Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals by Insurance Company and Owner in Workmen's Compensation Case. Cleaner's Death in Accident During Employment Held Compensable Under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 16
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves two appeals under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, filed by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (Insurance Company) and Dyaneshwar Madhukar Jare (owner of the vehicle) against the judgment and order dated 29.5.2013 of the learned Commissioner of Workmen Compensation & Judge, 2nd Labour Court, Thane. The original claimant, Eshwari Vellapandi Devar, filed an application for compensation claiming that her son, Selveakumar @ Kumar Vellapandi Devar, who was employed as a cleaner on towing vehicle No. MH04-B-9534, died on 11.02.2006 in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. The owner did not contest the proceedings, but the Insurance Company filed a written statement denying that the deceased was employed by the owner and that the accident occurred in the course of employment. The Commissioner framed issues and, after considering evidence, found that the deceased died due to injuries sustained in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, that he was employed as a cleaner earning Rs.4000 per month, and quantified compensation at Rs.4,45,420 with interest at 12% per annum from the date of accident till final payment. The Insurance Company and the owner appealed. The High Court, per Justice Anuja Prabhudessai, heard arguments. The Insurance Company's counsel argued that the deceased was not an employee and the accident did not arise out of employment, while the owner's counsel argued that the Insurance Company should be solely liable. The court noted that the Commissioner's findings were based on evidence, including the claimant's testimony and documents, and the Insurance Company failed to produce any evidence to rebut the claim. The court held that the accident arose out of and in the course of employment, and the compensation and interest were correctly calculated. The appeals were dismissed, and the impugned judgment was upheld. The court also disposed of the interim applications.

Headnote

A) Workmen's Compensation - Employer-Employee Relationship - Accident Arising Out of Employment - Section 30, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - The court considered whether the deceased cleaner was employed and died in an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. The Commissioner found the deceased was employed as a cleaner earning Rs.4000 per month and died due to injuries sustained in an accident during employment. The High Court upheld the finding, noting the Insurance Company failed to rebut the presumption of employment. Held that the accident arose out of and in the course of employment (Paras 4-6).

B) Workmen's Compensation - Quantum of Compensation - Interest - Schedule 4, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - The Commissioner quantified compensation at Rs.4,45,420 based on age, income, and relevant factor under Schedule 4, with interest at 12% per annum from the date of accident. The High Court affirmed the quantum and interest rate, finding no error in the calculation. Held that the compensation and interest were correctly awarded (Paras 4, 7).

C) Workmen's Compensation - Liability of Insurance Company - Section 30, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - The Insurance Company challenged liability, denying employment and accident in course of employment. The court held that the Insurance Company failed to produce evidence to rebut the claimant's evidence. The Commissioner's finding of liability was based on evidence, and the High Court found no perversity. Held that the Insurance Company is jointly liable with the owner to pay compensation (Paras 3-6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the deceased cleaner died in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, and whether the Insurance Company and owner are liable to pay compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Both appeals are dismissed. The impugned judgment and order dated 29.5.2013 passed by the learned Commissioner of Workmen Compensation & Judge, 2nd Labour Court, Thane in Application (WCA) No. 105-B-22/2012 is upheld. Interim applications are disposed of.

Law Points

  • Workmen's Compensation Act
  • 1923
  • Section 30
  • Employer-Employee Relationship
  • Accident Arising Out of and In Course of Employment
  • Burden of Proof
  • Interest Rate
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (11) 79

First Appeal No. 430 of 2017 with Interim Application No.10316 of 2022 and First Appeal No.1056 of 2022 with Interim Application No.10315 of 2022

2022-11-11

Anuja Prabhudessai

2022:BHC-AS:27610

Mr. S.M.Dange for the Appellant-Insurance Company in FA/430/2022, Ms. Reena Kundu for the Respondent No.1, Mr. P.M.Mokashi for the Appellant in FA/1056/2022

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (in FA/430/2017) and Dyaneshwar Madhukar Jare (in FA/1056/2022)

Mrs. Eshwari Vellapandi Devar & Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeals under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 challenging the award of compensation by the Commissioner.

Remedy Sought

The Insurance Company and the owner sought to set aside the Commissioner's order awarding compensation to the claimant.

Filing Reason

The Insurance Company denied liability on grounds that the deceased was not an employee and the accident did not arise out of employment; the owner also challenged the award.

Previous Decisions

The Commissioner of Workmen Compensation & Judge, 2nd Labour Court, Thane allowed the claim application and awarded Rs.4,45,420 with 12% interest per annum from the date of accident.

Issues

Whether the deceased cleaner died in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment? Whether the Insurance Company and owner are liable to pay compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923?

Submissions/Arguments

Mr. Dange for the Insurance Company argued that the deceased was not an employee of the owner and the accident did not arise out of employment. Mr. Mokashi for the owner argued that the Insurance Company should be solely liable to pay compensation.

Ratio Decidendi

The accident arose out of and in the course of employment as the deceased was a cleaner on the vehicle and died due to injuries sustained in an accident during his employment. The Insurance Company failed to rebut the evidence of employment. Compensation was correctly calculated based on age, income, and Schedule 4 factor, with interest at 12% per annum from the date of accident.

Judgment Excerpts

Learned Commissioner framed the issues and upon considering the evidence, recorded a finding that the deceased had expired due to the injuries sustained in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. The said judgment, is assailed by the Appellant Insurance Company as well as the owner of the Vehicle.

Procedural History

The original claimant filed an application for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act in 2012. The Commissioner allowed the claim on 29.5.2013. The Insurance Company filed First Appeal No. 430 of 2017 and the owner filed First Appeal No. 1056 of 2022. The appeals were heard together and dismissed on 11.11.2022.

Acts & Sections

  • Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923: Section 30, Schedule 4
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals by Insurance Company and Owner in Workmen's Compensation Case. Cleaner's Death in Accident During Employment Held Compensable Under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Goa Allows Writ Petition for Asset Disclosure Under Section 151 CPC in Pending Suit. The Court held that an application for disclosure of assets by the defendant is maintainable under Section 151 CPC during the pendency of a s...