ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. SHANTI DEVI PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed by the appellant insurer under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') being aggrieved by the order dated 14. 8. 1998 passed by the Commissioner of labour Court (constituted under the Act) in case No. 25 of 1997 W. C. Act (F) awarding the claim of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 regarding death of their predecessor Raj kumar Pandey alias Pappu for Rs. 1,32,822 with penalty of 25 per cent on such sum and also interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that deceased Raj Kumar alias pappu, aged 22 years, the husband of respondent No. 1, father of respondent No. 2 and son of respondent No. 3, was working under the employment of respondent No. 4 as driver on her truck bearing registration no. MP 19-A 5030. On dated 3. 11. 1996 at about 9. 10 in the morning, the aforesaid truck was being repaired in the auto garage of Raju alias Anwar Khan at Birla Road, satna and the deceased, being driver and on duty, was looking after such truck. The other companion drivers were also present there. At the aforesaid time, Mahendra kumar Jain, husband of respondent No. 4 and his brother Narendra Kumar Jain accompanied with one Chunni Lal, came there and badly beat the deceased. Result-antly, deceased sustained injuries and was admitted in the Birla Vikas Hospital for treatment, where he succumbed to such injuries. The salary of the deceased was rs. 1,200 p. m. Besides this, he was also getting Rs. 25 per day as allowance. He had a valid and effective driving licence. The vehicle was registered in the name of respondent No. 4 and insured with the appellant. The risk of driver and cleaner of the truck was also covered under the certificate of insurance. Due to untimely death of the predecessor of the respondents they have been deprived of the sole breadwinner of the family and also sustained mental pain and agony. With these pleadings, respondent Nos. 1 to 3 preferred their claim for the compensation of Rs. 3,24,000 with penalty and interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.

(3.) IN reply of the respondent No. 4, the death of said Raj Kumar Pandey during the course of discharging the duty as an employee of respondent No. 4 was admitted while the averments regarding his murder are denied. She also admitted the ownership of such truck. She contended that such truck was being repaired in the auto garage of one Raju alias Anwar and the deceased being under her employment as driver, was looking after such repairing. As per further averments in the course of repairing of such truck, the deceased fell down from the truck and sustained the injuries. He was not beaten by above named persons. The salary of the deceased Rs. 1,200 per month and allowance of Rs. 25 per day are also admitted. The criminal case against her husband has falsely been registered. Deceased was not the regular employee of the respondent No. 4. In any case, on holding the liability, respondent No. 4 is not responsible to indemnify the claim and the same be saddled against the appellant insurer as the truck was insured with it.