ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. RAJANI PARIDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the judgment dated 25.6.1999 passed in W.C. Case No. 64 of 1996. The said W.C. case was filed by respondent No. 1, wife of the deceased driver late Harichandra Parida.

(2.) The case of the claimant-respondent No. 1 was that her husband was working as a driver under the respondent No. 2 and was engaged in driving Trax bearing registration No. OR 18-0624. On 17.2.1996 at about 11 p.m. while the deceased was driving the said vehicle and coming from Rayagada to Gupteswar, on the way, met with an accident, as a consequence of which the deceased sustained severe bodily injuries and died at the spot. On notice being issued, the appellant insurer and the respondent No. 2, the owner of the vehicle, appeared before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation-cum-Joint Labour Commissioner, Jeypore and filed their written statements. Respondent No. 2, the owner of the vehicle while admitting the fact of accident and that the deceased died during the course of his employment stated, inter alia, that the deceased was getting a wage of Rs. 2,000 per month and Rs. 10 per day towards daily expenses. It has also been stated that the deceased was holding a valid driving licence and the vehicle was insured with the appellant. The policy number of the insurance was also disclosed in his written statement. The insurer, however, while denying the allegations of the claimant, inter alia, pleaded in the written statement that on verification of the case record in G.R. Case No. 117 of 1996 it was found that the driving licence No. 333 of 1995-96 as per the record of the office of R.T.O., Koraput, was not issued to the deceased driver. It is, therefore, pleaded that as the deceased has no valid driving licence at the time of accident, the appellant insurer is not liable to pay any compensation.

(3.) Learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation after recording evidence and analysing the same along with the documents produced, passed the impugned judgment holding that the deceased was aged about 24 years and was getting a wage of Rs. 1,700 per month at the time of accident and died in the said accident which arose out of and in the course of employment under respondent No. 2 and, therefore, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 1,85,699.50 along with simple interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of accident, i.e., 17.2.1996 till payment.