NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. LALDINGNGHETI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Lalfakawma, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Saurabh Pradhan, learned counsel for respondent No. 1. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 remain unrepresented though notice was duly served upon them.

(2.) This is an appeal filed u/s 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, against the Judgment and Award dtd. 17/11/2017, passed by the Commissioner, Employees' Compensation, Aizawl in W.C. Case No. 7 of 2016, wherein, the learned Commissioner, Employees' Compensation, Aizawl directed the appellant/Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.4,04,120.00 (Rupees four lakh four thousand one hundred and twenty) only with interest @ 7% p.a from the date of an accident i.e. 27/4/2016 to the claimant/respondent No. 1. The interlocutory applications filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the C.P.C, 1908 in I.A. (Civil) No. 10 of 2023 is also considered along with the instant appeal.

(3.) Brief facts of the case is that on 27/4/2016, at around 10:20 am, one Mr. P.C. Lalbiakzara met with an accident at Electric Veng, Aizawl, and sustained injuries by falling off from the top of a Maxicab (Sumo) bearing registration No. MZ-04-7257 due to the snapping of the rope while he tied up the passengers luggage and he succumbed to his injuries on 4/5/2016. On the death of Mr. P.C. Lalbiakzara, his wife, who is respondent No. 1, herein approached the Commissioner, Employees' Compensation, Aizawl by filing W. C. Case No. 7 of 2016 u/s 22 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 claiming a compensation of Rs.9,97,800.00 (Rupees nine lakhs ninety seven thousand eight hundred). The owner of the vehicle/respondent No. 2 had contested the case by claiming that his vehicle was validly insured with the appellant/New India Assurance Co. Ltd and as such, he was not liable to pay the compensation. The appellant/ Insurance Company also contested the claim by denying that the victim, Mr. P.C. Lalbiakzara died in course of his employment and also contested the income of the deceased which was claimed to be Rs.10,000.00 (Rupees ten thousand) per month. The appellant also denied the validity of all the documents annexed in the claim petition except the insurance policy.