SUKHMINDER SINGH Vs. BALJIT KAUR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order of Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 and Assistant Labour Commissioner, Sangrur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner') vide which the present appellant has been held liable to pay the compensation on account of death of Iqbal Singh alias Ghudi, who has died in accident while working as driver.

(2.) The mother of the deceased Iqbal Singh filed the petition on the ground that her son was working as a driver under the employment of respondents. In the month of Feb. 2004, he was driving the Harvester Combine bearing registration No.PB-63-8783 which met with an accident near Village Pathke, Police Station Marath (U.P.), District Lalitpur as a result of which he died on the same day. Post-mortem was conducted in the hospital at Lalitpur. At the time of accident, her son was unmarried and was drawing wages at the rate of Rs. 3,000.00 per month. It is further submitted that a legal notice dated 17.3.2004 was served upon the respondents but did not elicit any response and as such both the respondents were jointly and severally held liable to pay the compensation. The claimant prayed for compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,77,830.00 along with penalty to the extent of 50 per cent of the compensation and interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum w.e.f. 24.3.2004 till payment.

(3.) After notice, respondent No.1-Dalbara Singh alias Darbara Singh Sekhon (respondent No.2 herein) denied the relationship as master and servant with the deceased and further denied that said Harvester Combine was registered in his name. He also denied the receipt of notice and raised objections on the ground of jurisdiction, maintainability and nonjoinder of necessary parties. Respondent No.2-Sukhminder Singh (appellant herein) represented by his LRs was served with the registered notices, however, the same received back with the report of refusal and accordingly he was proceeded ex parte. The tribunal framed issues, recorded evidence and accordingly held respondent No.2 i.e. Sukhminder Singh (appellant) liable to pay the compensation as claimed by the mother of the deceased along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum w.e.f. 25.10.2004 till the date of payment. He was further held liable to pay the penalty to the tune of 10 per cent of the amount of compensation. However, it was ordered that respondent No.2 was free to recover this amount from respondent No.1 (respondent No.2 herein). Aggrieved from this order, respondent No.2-Sukhminder Singh has come in appeal.