UDHAV RANGNATHRAO PAWAR Vs. SHESHRAO RAMJI JOGDAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the original respondent No. 1, who is the owner of the Tempo No. MH-22-2167, challenging the judgment and award dt. 7. 2. 2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge S. D. and ex Officio Commissioner for Workmen's compensation, at Parbhani in N. F. A. No. 20 of 2007. By this award the appellant/owner is directed, along with respondent No. 2 New india Assurance Company Ltd., to pay the amount of Rs. 90. 000/- jointly and severally to respondent No. 1 claimant. It has further directed the appellant to pay simple interest at 12 per cent per annum on the decretal amount of Rs. 90,000/- from the date of the incident i. e. . 12. 2005 till its full liquidation. It has further directed the appellant to pay rs. 45,000/- towards penalty.

(2.) The appellant has challenged this award to the extent of directing the appellant to pay simple interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum on the decretal sum from the date of incident i. e. 2. 12. 2005 and also to the extent it directs the appellant to pay penalty of Rs. 45. 000/-, which is 50% of the total amount of compensation. The order to the extent it holds the appellant and respondent No. 2 jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation of the tune of Rs. 90. 000/- to respondent No. 1, has not been challenged.

(3.) The appellant/owner filed his written statement and denied the claim. Appellant denied that the accident occurred out of and in the course of an employment of respondent no. 1 as a Cleaner/labour, as alleged. The appellant denied his liability and also disputed the relationship of master and servant or employer and employee between the appellant and respondent No. 1. Alternatively, the appellant submitted that the tempo was insured with respondent No. 2 insurance company and if at all any liability to pay compensation arises, it is respondent No. 2 company, which is liable to pay the same in terms of the policy, in respect of the vehicle.