NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. GANESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NEW India Assurance co. Ltd. , through its Divisional Manager, filed present appeal challenging the award passed by the Workmen's Compensation commissioner and I/c Judge, Labour court, Latur, dated 16. 3. 1999 in Workmen's Compensation Application No. 95 of 1997.

(2.) THE facts in nutshell, leading to the present appeal, are that: truck bearing registration No. MHQ 2581 belongs to opponent No. 1 Vithal manaji Boyane, r/o Kava, Tq. and District latur. It was further claimed that the said truck was insured with original opponent no. 2 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. , through its Branch Manager, Latur. The applicant, the present respondent No. 1, ganesh s/o Narayan Pitle was engaged by opponent No. 1 Vithal Manaji Boyane as cleaner on the said truck on the monthly salary of Rs. 2,000 along with bhatta of rs. 25 per day. It was further claimed that on 21. 10. 1996, the applicant was on duty as cleaner on the said truck. It was further alleged that on 21. 10. 1996 in the evening, the said truck was proceeding from Latur towards Ausa and when the truck came near Ausa naka, the driver of the said truck could not control the truck and in an attempt to avoid dash to a bullock-cart, gave dash to the bullock-cart and thereafter to a tree by the side of the road. It was alleged that the driver of the said truck was driving the truck in a rash and negligent manner. Applicant Ganesh Pitle sustained multiple injuries in the said accident. He was immediately taken to the hospital at Latur for treatment on account of the said injuries. It was claimed that there is permanent disability to the extent of 25 per cent. The applicant accordingly claimed compensation of Rs. 2,26,380 from the owner of the vehicle and the insurance company with whom the truck was insured. The owner of the truck, though served, remained absent. The matter was accordingly proceeded ex parte against the owner. The insurance company, present appellant, by filing written statement at Exh. 6, denied the claim on all counts. It was contended that the driver of the truck was not having valid licence when the said accident took place. Secondly, it was contended that the vehicle was not used as per the permit and thirdly the vehicle being used without having the fitness certificate. It was claimed that the insurance company cannot be held responsible to pay the compensation, as claimed.

(3.) CONSIDERING the pleadings, issues were framed and the parties to the application were accordingly allowed to lead oral and documentary evidence and the judge, Labour Court, after considering the evidence on record, allowed the said application by order dated 16. 3. 1999, concluding that there is 25 per cent permanent disability to the applicant reducing 100 per cent loss of earning capacity. He further concluded that the applicant is entitled to an amount of Rs. 2,71,756 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from 23. 11. 1996. The opponent Nos. 1 and 2 were accordingly directed to pay the above said amount to the applicant. A further direction was given to issue show-cause notice to opponent No. 1 as to why 50 per cent penalty should not be imposed on him in view of the provisions of section 4-A (3) of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 16. 3. 1999, the original opponent No. 2, insurance company, has filed the present appeal.