NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. ROSHANBEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant in First Appeal No.1123 of 2017 i.e. Insurance Company takes exception to judgment and order dtd. 18/7/2016, passed by learned Commissioner for Employee's Compensation and C.J.S.D., Osmanabad in W.C.A. No.36 of 2013, by which provisions under Sec. 10 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923, were invoked by the legal heir of deceased Allanoor, on account of death of Allanoor in the course of alleged employment as a Cleaner. Appellant in First Appeal No.4003 of 2016 i.e. owner of the Tanker, challenges the aforesaid judgment and order dtd. 18/7/2016 to the extent of imposing penalty and interest on him.

(2.) Original Petitioner Roshanbee Mainoddin Mulani instituted above proceedings for compensation on the ground that her son Allanoor was engaged as a Cleaner over Tanker bearing no.MH-25 B9242. The said Tanker was proceeding towards Hyderabad. When it reached Katraj Square in Pune, her son made complaint of giddiness and was taken to the hospital and treated at Bharti Hospital, Pune. On examination, he was declared dead. MLC proceedings no.117 of 2011 were registered under Sec. 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at Katraj Police Chauki, Pune.

(3.) Further case put forth is that deceased, who was 22 years of age, earned salary of Rs.6,000.00 p.m. alongwith Daily Bhatta of Rs.50.00. The father of the deceased had already expired. Therefore, petitioner mother, being solely dependent on sole income of her son, has been deprived of the same as death of her son had occurred during the course of employment and therefore, it is her case that the owner of the Tanker and its insurer are both liable to pay the compensation with interest.