NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. ABUL KALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal under Sec. 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (now renamed as 'Employees Compensation Act, 1923' and hereinafter referred to as 'Act') the Insurance Company has challenged the judgment and award dated 11.1.2007 passed by the W.C. Commissioner, Nagaon in NWC Case No. 334 of 2001. By that judgment and award the learned WC Commissioner directed the insurance company to make payment of Rs.1,20,000.00 to the claimant under Sec. 4(1) (d) of the Act. Immediately, the insurance company preferred this appeal and obtained stay order within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of the awarded amount before the jurisdictional WC Commissioner. This court by passing an interim order allowed the workman to withdraw 50% of the deposited amount.

(2.) The brief facts involved in this appeal are that one Md. Abul Kalam claiming to be driver of a truck bearing registration No. AS-01A/5215 belonging to one Md. Amir Ahmed Khan (opposite party No.1) stated that the vehicle met with an accident on 24.10.2001 whereupon it turned turtle on NH -37 at about 5.15 pm near Senchowa. Resultantly, he sustained multiple grievous injuries on his chest and hip joint and multiple abrasions on his head, forehead etc. Immediately, he was taken to nearest clinic and was subsequently treated in Nagaon Civil Hospital. Nagaon Sadar Police Station registered Nagaon P.S. GDE No. 516 on 24.10.2001 with respect to the accident and proceeded on investigation. According to the claimant, he was subsequently treated by private doctor. But even thereafter he remained permanently and partially disabled. It is further stated that he was drawing salary of Rs.1500.00 per month in addition to Rs.100.00 as daily allowance. He also disclosed that the vehicle was covered by valid insurance under opposite party No. 2, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vide policy No.2000/6305702.

(3.) On being notified, opposite party No.1 did not appear and did not file any written statement but the opposite party No.2 insurance company appeared and submitted written statement denying liability and responsibility for making any payment. According to the insurance company, there was no permanent and partial disablement and the claim was based on false evidence. The learned WC Commissioner put the parties to prove their respective cases whereupon claimant examined himself as PW-1 and one Dr. Jadav Sarmah as PW-2. He exhibited as many as 12 documents. Ext.-1 is the Accident Information report, Exhibit-2 is the X-ray report. He also exhibited prescriptions issued by his doctor. The witnesses were thoroughly cross examined by the insurance company. On the other hand, opposite party No. 2 examined two witnesses from their side. DW-1 is one Md. Salamuddin who was an employee of Jasmin Pharmacy which had issued Exhibit-2 x-ray report. However, this witness stated that Exhibit-2 was never issued from their establishment and this he gave in writing vide Exhibit-ka. DW-2 is Dr. J. Bebnath, Radiologist in whose name x-ray report was furnished by claimant. Dr. Debnath came in the witness box and stated on oath that he is radiologist but he did not give x-ray report. He denied the seal or signature appearing in Exhibit-2 to be his seal or signature. Thus, x-ray report produced by the claimant was unequivocally falsified by DW-2. This witness was thoroughly examined but his examination was not shaken in any way. Considering the material available on record, the WC Commissioner arrived at the following findings: