RAJNEESH NANJOO YADAV Vs. ASR CONSTRUCTION CO.ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the original claimant who filed Application (ECA) 401/C-131/2017 before the Commissioner under the Employees Compensation Act and the Labour Court, Mumbai, seeking compensation for injuries sustained by him in an accident which occurred during the course of his employment with respondent no.1 - ASR Construction Co, claiming that the accident resulted into 100% loss of his earning capacity, and hence he is entitled for compensation of Rs.10,55,760.00 along with interest at the rate of 12% and penalty.

(2.) On 4/7/2019, the learned Commissioner partly allowed his application and held him entitled for compensation of Rs.3,16,728.00 along with interest @ 12% p.a. from 30/4/2017 till its realization. He is also held entitled for penalty of Rs.10,000.00and medical expenses of Rs.1,57,770.00. His employer and the Insurance Company were directed to jointly and severally deposit the amount of compensation along with interest of 12%. The employer was directed to deposit interest on the amount of compensation from the date of accident i.e. 30/4/2017 till 19/12/2017 and the insurer is directed to deposit interest from 20/12/2017 till its realization. Penalty of Rs.10,000.00 is levied on employer, whereas the medical expenses are directed to be paid jointly and severally by respondent nos.1 and 2.

(3.) The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned order, since according to him, the Commissioner has erred in holding that 68% of physical disability of the claimant has resulted into 30% functional disability, which is not borne from the evidence placed before him. The appellant has instituted the Appeal on the ground that the Commissioner has failed to consider that the claimant is driver by occupation and he cannot drive any vehicle in future and therefore, the loss of earning capacity is to be computed at 100%. Further, the income of the appellant which is taken as Rs.8,000.00 in absence of any documentary evidence, is also pleaded to be an erroneous computation, when the appellant has deposed that he was being paid Rs.10,000.00 per month by respondent no.1 and this factum was not denied by the employer either by filing the written statement or cross-examining the claimant.