ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. SURAJ AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) This first appeal from order has been moved by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited against judgement and award order dated 09.02018 passed by Commissioner Employee Compensation Act, 1923/Dy. Labour Commissioner, Allahabad, Region- Allahabad in Case No.E.C.10 of 2010, whereby the appellant- Insurance Company- was directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.4,72,944/- along with accruing interest at the rate of 12% per annum and the amount has been directed to be paid within 30 days.

(3.) Magnitude of the contention is based on fact that the driver of the offending truck (Truck No.U.P.- 51T/1543), as alleged by the injured, has not been proved by positive terms and cogent evidence, whereas the fact is that Insurance Company upon full fledged enquiry found that the claim raised regarding driver, who infact was present at the time of alleged accident, was not the person alleged by the injured and the registered letter by the person naming as driver has been sent to the lower court is indicative of fact that he was not the driver of the truck in question at the time of the accident. But the learned Commissioner overlooking the legal and factual aspect of the case and has without any cogent reasons rejected the transparent inquiry conducted by the Investigator of the Insurance Company. He contended that the factum of accident is not proved. The amount award is excessive and against the provision of law. No disability accrued to the injured respondent. The assessment of compensation amount has not been properly fixed for the reasons that disability accrued to the injured will be pegged to 50% and not to 60% as per the certificate issued by the concerned C.M.O.