ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. Vs. SHANTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.7.1992 passed in Workmen Compensation Case No. 11 of 1991 by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner -cum -Deputy Labour Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra, wereby and whereunder the appellant -company has been directed to pay compensation of Rs. 90,552/ - to Respondent nos. 1 & 2.

(2.) IN short, the relevant facts are that Binod Sah son of Respondent nos. 1 & 2 (claimants) fell out of the vehicle bearing No. BR 01 -B/9817 (Maxi -Taxi) which has insured with the appellant -company and died whereupon the aforesaid claim case was filed by Respondent nos. 1 & 2 for payment of compensation under the Workmen Compensation Act. Respondent no. 3, who is owner of the vehicle pleaded that the vehicle was insured with the appellant -company and, thus, the liability to pay compensation was of the appellant. The appellant -company raised objection that the deceased being engaged as Khalasi in the vehicle there was no liability of the company to pay the compensation under Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Insurer 'sliability is only with respect to those covered by the first proviso to Section 147. Workmen Compensation Commissioner -cum -Deputy Labour Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra vide impugned order on consideration of the materials on record has awarded a sum of Rs. 90,552/ - payable by way of compensation to the claimant (Respondent nos. 1 & 2). There appears to be no dispute as regards quantum of compensation. The only dispute in the appeal is as regards the liability to pay compensation.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has submitted that in view of the clear provision as well as the law settled by the Apex Court in the case of Mallawwa & Ors. vs. Oriental Insurance Co., Ltd., & Ors., reported in (1999) 1 S.C.C. 403 which has dealt with the similar provision as existed earlier in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 with respect to the words "any person" -in the main provision, an exception was made by enacting the first proviso so as to restrict liability of the Insurer with respect to the employees and does not cover any 'one employed as Khalasi in a vehicle insured.