KONDAIAH,J. - (1.) This Letters Patent Appeal by an employer and owner of a lorry is directed against the judgment of our learned brother, Chinnappa Reddy J., dismissing his Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No 248 of 1971 preferred against the order of the Commissioner for Work men's Compensation, Visakapatnam in an application for indemnification by the respondent. insurance company under section 12 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
(2.) The appellant is the owner of the lorry A. P. K. 9711 in respect of which a policy was taken from M/s, Hindustan Ideal Insurance Company Ltd., Kakinada, the respondent herein. The respondent insurer had guaranteed to indemnify any loss caused to the appellant.assured as a result of any accident in which the motor vehicle may be involved during the currency of the policy. During the subsistence of the policy, an accident had occurred to the appellant's lorry on 25-4-1968 at Vizianagaram resulting in the death of one M. Apparao, the cleaner of the lorry. The deceased Apparan was an employee of the appellant and he died by an accident out of and in the course of his employment. The dependants of the deceased employee have filed an application before the Commissioner for workmen's Compensation, Visakapatnam against the appellant, the employer, for awarding compensation. The appellant. after the receipt of the notice, admitted his liability to pay a sum of Rs. 6,000/- towards compensation to the dependants of the deceased employee.
(3.) The appellant has filed W. C. I. A. No. 201/69 under section 12 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. 1923 (hereinafter called the Act), against respondent insurance company seeking indemnification of the sum of Rs. 8,000/- which was admitted by him to be paid to the dependants of the deceased employee towards compensation. The insurance company, against whom the indemnifiestion was sought for, was made the sole respondent in the application filed by the appellant under section 12 of the Act. The dependants of the deceased employee who claimed compensation before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (hereinafter called the Commissioner) did not choose to make the insurance company a party respondent along with the employer and the owner of the lorry, the appellant herein After the receipt of notice in the application under section 12 (2) of the Act, the respondent insurance company filed its objections and opposed the claim of the appellant contending inter alia that the application under section 12 (2) of the Act for indemnification against the insurer is not maintainable.;