NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. RAJAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prabha Sridevan, J.

(2.) THE insurance company has challenged the award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Tirunelveli on the ground that it has no liability to indemnify the insured, for the accident to respondent No. 1.

(3.) THE distinction that was sought to be placed by learned Counsel for the appellant with regard to the choice of forums for obtaining a decision on the claim for compensation had received the attention of the Supreme Court in Rita Devi v. New India Assurance Co. ltd. . In that case, the claim for compensation was made for the death of the driver of an autorickshaw which was the insured vehicle. THE driver was murdered. A claim petition was filed under the Motor Vehicles Act. THE Apex Court considered the legal import of the words 'accidents arising out of the use of motor vehicle' and held that the murder was due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle. In arriving at this conclusion the Apex Court held thus:We do not see how the objects of the two Acts, namely, the Motor Vehicles Act and the Workmen's Compensation Act are in any way different. In our opinion, the relevant object of both the Acts are to provide compensation to the victims of accidents. THE only difference between the two enactments is that so far as the Workmen's Compensation Act is concerned, it is confined to workmen as defined under that Act while the relief provided under Chapters X to XII of the Motor Vehicles Act is available to all the victims of accidents involving a motor vehicle. In this conclusion of ours, we are supported by Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act as per which provision, it is open to the claimants either to proceed to claim compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act or under the Motor Vehicles Act. A perusal of the objects of the two enactments clearly establishes that both the enactments are beneficial enactments operating in the same field, hence judicially accepted interpretation of the word 'death' in Workmen's Compensation Act is, in our opinion, applicable to the interpretation of the word death in the Motor Vehicles Act also.In this case, instead of death, the compensation was claimed on account of the injuries. It is no doubt true that the respondent No. 1 chose the forum constituted under the Workmen's Compensation Act. That his injury occurred during the course of employment is established beyond doubt that his employer was insured by the appellant is also not in dispute. In these circumstances, if it is established that the accident occurred 'in a public place' and arose out of the use of a motor vehicle, then Section 167 permits the choice of claiming compensation under either of the two Acts as per the decision cited above.