ROHIT WALIA Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is directed against the award of the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation (Rural), Shimla in Case No. 3 of 1995 whereby he dismissed the petition filed by the claimant.

(2.) The allegations in the claim were that claimant Rohit Walia had been employed by his brother, Ramesh Kumar, as a driver on Swaraj Mazda No. HIS 3093. It was further alleged that while he was driving the said vehicle, the same met with an accident on 7.1.1994 resulting in serious injuries to the claimant. As a result of injuries, he suffered 100 per cent disability. The owner of the vehicle did not deny the relationship of employer and employee and also did not deny the wages being paid to the deceased. It was, however, submitted that since the vehicle was duly insured, the liability to pay compensation is that of the insurance company. The insurance company took up various pleas. One of the pleas taken was that the petitioner was not driving the vehicle during the course of employment and that he was not employee of Ramesh Kumar. It was also alleged that unauthorised persons were being carried in the vehicle. It was also averred that the petition is collusive. It was also alleged that driver did not have a valid driving licence.

(3.) The Commissioner has come to the conclusion that it cannot be believed that the younger brother would employ an elder brother as a driver of the truck. He has further held that the petitioner was only in possession of learner's licence and as such the insurance company is not liable.