IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INS. CO LTD Vs. SUNITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall also govern disposal of M.A.No.727/2006 as both the appeals are arising out of award dated 30.11.2005 passed by Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Act in WCF Case No.18/2005, whereby appeal filed by the claimants respondents No.1 to 5 was allowed and compensation of Rs.3,98,800/- was awarded on account of death of Santosh, who died on 19.12.2004. Shri Atul Jaiswal counsel for the claimants pleaded no instructions, SPC was issued but claimants are absent.

(2.) Short facts of the case are that claimants, who are respondents No.1 to 5, filed a claim petition alleging that deceased Santosh was working as Driver with respondent No.6 and his salary was Rs.4,000/- per month in addition to dearness allowance @ Rs.50/- per day. It was alleged that deceased Santosh was driver on Toyota Qualis bearing registration No.MP-53 D-0376 and was going to Jabalpur. It was alleged that at that time Santosh was murdered during course of his employment. It was alleged that offending vehicle was insured, therefore, compensation be awarded. The claim petition was contested by the appellant on various grounds including the ground that since it was not a motor accident, therefore, Insurance Company cannot be held liable. It was alleged that since the vehicle was private vehicle and was being used for carrying passengers, therefore, Insurance Company was not liable. It was alleged that income assessed is on higher side, which is Rs.3,000/- per month. It was prayed that claim petition be dismissed. After framing of issues learned Court below allowed the claim petition and awarded the compensation as stated hereinabove.

(3.) Learned counsel for appellant argued at length and submits that impugned award is incorrect, illegal and deserves to be set aside. It is submitted that it was not a case of motor accident, therefore, Insurance Company cannot be held liable. It is submitted that the offending vehicle was the private vehicle and was being used for carrying passengers. It is submitted that income assessed is on higher side as the investigator during the course of investigation found that income of the deceased was @ Rs.3,000/- per month. Reliance is placed on a decision in the matter of Mamtaj bi Vs. United India Insurance Co.Ltd., 2010 ACJ 2661, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court observed that since vehicle was not involved in accident and death of workmen has no proximate or direct connection with the vehicle and also use of vehicle has not even been claimed as a ground for fastening liability, therefore, Insurance Company is not liable. It is submitted that appeal be allowed and the impugned order be quashed.