NARAYAN CHOKHOBA WAGHBHIJE Vs. SANGITA CHANDRAKANT GHARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant takes exception to the order passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Judge Labour Court at Latur in Application (WCA) No. 4 of 98 dtd. 30/7/2001.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the Appeal were that the appellant was a driver with respondent no.1. Respondent No. 1 owned a truck bearing no. Mh-04-C-6933 and was insured with respondent no.2. He met with a vehicular accident on 13/4/1997. He sustained the injury to his femur and toe of the left leg. He was hospitalised for around twenty days. He sustained 35% physical disability. He was employed with respondent no.2 on the day of the accident. He could not work as before the accident. He served the notices to both respondents. However, none of the respondents has paid him the compensation. Hence, he filed an application under Sec. 3 and 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1923 (now Employees Compensation Act 1923) ("1923 Act", for short).

(3.) The learned Commissioner rejected his Claim for the reason that the appellant had already approached the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and had received the compensation under sec. 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988; ("M.V.Act", for short) therefore, the Claim is barred under sec. 167 of the M.V. Act. Hence, this appeal.