NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY Vs. TEJ RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As the petitions involved common questions of law therefore all the petitions are taken up together for hearing and being disposed of by common judgment.

(2.) The respondent No. 1, claimant before the Labour Court in all the petitions, has been held entitled to the amount as mentioned in the impugned award to be paid by the appellant herein by the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation (Assistant Labour Commissioner), Doda.

(3.) The learned counsel" for the appellant/petitioner has in all fairness made submissions only with regard to the applicability of the policy which was obtained by the respondent No. 2 and on the basis of which the claim petitions were decided before the Labour Commissioner. The policy is on record. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the policy obtained by the respondent No. 2 where the claimant before the Labour Court was allegedly employed as workman could not be pressed into service for filing claim petition and the award consequently passed is not sustainable in law. The reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the appellant on 2005 ACJ 409 (Madras High Court) titled National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. V. Prabhu Das and 2007 ACJ 1580 titled New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V. Arunachalam and others (Madras High Court) wherein the insurance company was absolved of liability of paying award.