RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SURESH PARJAPATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are preferred against the award dtd. 6/11/2019 passed by the Commissioner, Employees' Compensation Act, Bundi, Headquarter, Kota whereby the amount of Rs.11,89,800.00 was awarded as compensation to the injuredrespondent who suffered amputation resulting in 65% permanent disability while working at the mines and doing work on the loader vehicle which was duly insured under the Reliance Miscellaneous and Special Types of Vehicles Package Policy Certificate cum Policy Schedule issued by the appellant-company namely Reliance General Insurance.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that there is a gross perversity in the order passed by the Commissioner, Employees' Compensation while passing of the award. Learned counsel firstly submits that the income and compensation calculated is erroneous and does not go in confirmity with the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923.

(3.) Learned counsel further submits that the policy does not cover person who has suffered injuries while working on the loader and it is only the driver alone who can claim compensation under the Employees' Compensation Act and if at all claim could have been filed the same could be as a third party claim to be set up under the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the Employees' Compensation Commissioner has acted beyond his jurisdiction to hear the petition and pass an award. Learned counsel further submits that the injured claimant was not working as a driver on the vehicle and was shown to have been caused injuries while he was screwing the bolts of the loader when the driver of the vehicle without information started the vehicle resulting in causing severe injury to his hand which was amputated. Therefore he submits that the claimant cannot be said to be actually working as a driver on the vehicle.