MAYAPPA Vs. VITHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed an application seeking for compensation under the Employees Compensation Act. It was his contention in the claim petition that he was working as a driver in the tractor of the first respondent since two years and that on 9/5/2014, when the petitioner had come from the tractor garage to the market on the motorcycle of the first respondent-employer for purchasing the tractor's spare parts, all of a sudden, a person came in front of the motorcycle and there was an accident. Thus, it was the case of the petitioner as per the averments in paragraph Nos.1 and 2 of the claim petition that he was engaged as a driver for the tractor of the first respondent and while he was traveling in the motorcycle of the first respondent for the purpose of procuring spare parts to the tractor, an accident had occurred.

(2.) The petitioner filed an application seeking for impleading the insurer of the tractor by filing an application in I.A. No.10. This application was rejected on 30/3/2017 and was not challenged by the petitioner.

(3.) Thereafter on the death of his employer and the owner of the motorcycle i.e., the first respondent, the petitioner filed another application for impleading the L.Rs. of his employer and also the Insurance Company. This application has been rejected on the ground that the earlier application filed to implead the insurer of the tractor had been rejected and had attained finality. It is also held by the trial Court that the claimant was seeking for compensation from the owner and insurer of the motorcycle in the claim petition and therefore it was impermissible for him to implead the owner of the tractor i.e., his employer as respondent.