R. RANJAN Vs. FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AND THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER
LAWS(KER)-2003-4-69
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on April 02,2003

R. Ranjan Appellant
VERSUS
Fertilizers And Chemicals Travancore Limited, Represented By Its Managing Director And The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, By Its Branch Manager Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R. Rajendra Babu, J. - (1.) BOTH these appeals arise from the order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Ernakulam in W.C.C.No. 127/1994 dated, 10 -5 -1999. The appellant in M.F.A.739/2001, an employee of the Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Limited (F.A.C.T) sustained injury out of and in the course of employment. An amount of Rs. 28,540/was disbursed to him as compensation for the injury sustained in the course of his employment. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, he filed the application under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, claiming a total amount of Rs. 72,458/ -. After considering the entire evidence, the Workmen's Compensation Court fixed the compensation of Rs. 36,844/ -. As an amount of Rs. 28,514/ - was already paid, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation directed the employer as well as the Insurance Company to pay a further amount of Rs. 8,320/ -. Aggrieved by the above order passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner directing the Insurance Company to pay the amount, the Insurance, Company filed M.F.A.157/2001 challenging the above order. As the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation did not allow interest on the above amount, the injured worker filed M.F.A. 739/2001 claiming interest on the amount awarded.
(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, the employer and also the employee, appellant in M.F.A.739/2001. The main argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant in M.F.A.157/2001, the Insurance Company was that the Insurance Company had issued only a Group Personal Accident Policy in favour of the employer for the period from 2 -4 -1993 to 1 -4 -1994 covering the employees of the employer and in view, of the terms and conditions of the above policy, the compensation admissible is Rs. 28,514/was already disbursed to the employer and the Insurance Company had already discharged the liability to pay compensation in accordance with the terms of the policy. It was further argued that they have not issued a policy under the Workmen's Compensation Act, and if, any amount in excess of the amount already paid by the Insurance Company, is liable to pay to the employee. The liability is only on the employer and not on the Insurance Company.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company produced the policy and pointed that the policy prescribed the nature of injuries and also the compensation for such injuries and the above policy was not in accordance with the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act. In the nature of the above policy, the liability of the Insurance Company was to compensate the injuries sustained by the employee, only in accordance with the terms of the policy and not in accordance with the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Any amount in excess of the policy issued by the Insurance Company has to be paid by the employer as the liability under the Workmen's Compensation Act is with the employer. Hence, the liability to pay an amount of Rs. 8,320/ - awarded by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner was on the employer and the Insurance Company had already paid the entire amount liable to be paid by the Insurance Company, in accordance with the policy. The Workmen's Compensation Court found that the liability was with the Insurance Company. In view of the terms of the policy, the Insurance Company cannot be held liable to pay the amount of Rs.8,320/ - awarded by the Commissioner and the above amount has to be paid by the employer. The direction issued by the Commissioner to the Insurance Company is thus liable to be set aside and the employer has to remit the above amount in accordance with law.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.