AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B. Manohar, J.—These appeals and cross-objections are directed against the judgment and order dated 04-08-2008 made in WC/CR/433 to 436/2005 passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Sub-Division-I, Bellary.
MFA NOs.21588-21591 of 2009 are filed by the appellant-Insurance Company, being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the WCC fastening the liability on them to compensate the claimants. Whereas the claimants have filed Cross-Objection Nos. 100009 -100012 of 2014, being aggrieved by the rate of interest awarded by the WCC one month from the date of order, instead of one month after the date of accident.
Since the common question of law and facts are involved in these appeals and the common order passed by the WCC is challenged, all these appeals and cross objections are clubbed together and disposed of by this Common judgment.
The cross-objectors who are the first respondent in all the appeals filed claim petitions contenting that Cross-objectors in Crob. Nos. 100009-100011 of 2014 were working as labourers and Cross-objector in Crob. No. 100012/2014 was working as a driver in a Tractor and Trailer bearing registration No. KA-34/T-4021-4022 belonging to the second respondent/Smt. Basamma W/o. Late Ningappa. On 17-08-2005, as per the instructions of the owner of the Tractor and Trailer, after unloading the fertilizers in Durgaiah''s land, while returning back, the vehicle turned turtle in view of bad condition of the road resulting in the accident. Due to the accident, the labourers and driver working in the Tractor and Trailer sustained grievous injuries and they had taken treatment in Siraguppa Government Hospital and thereafter they had taken treatment at VIMS, Bellary. The claimants claimed that in view of the injuries and fractures they had sustained in the accident, they cannot work as labourers and driver. The owner of the vehicle was paying them Rs. 150/- per day to the labourers and a sum of Rs. 3,000/-p.m. was paid to the driver of the vehicle. The accident occurred during the course and out of employment. Hence, they sought for compensation.
Though the owner of the vehicle was served with notice, she remained unrepresented.
The Insurance Company filed written statement denying the entire averments and contended that the insurance policy does not cover the risk of the labourers working in the Tractor and Trailer; and also that the Tractor and Trailer is being used for commercial purpose in violation of the conditions of the Policy. Hence, the insurer is not liable to compensate the claimants and sought for dismissal of the claim petitions.
The WCC on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, taking into consideration the police records and other relevant records held that the claimants had sustained grievous injuries in the road traffic accident that occurred on 17-08-2005. The claimants are the labourers and driver working in the Tractor and Trailer and the accident occurred during course and out of employment. Hence they are entitled for compensation. With regard to quantum of compensation is concerned, the WCC taking into consideration assessment of the disability by the Doctor, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,18,432/- in respect of claimant/cross-objector in MFA Crob. 100009/2014; Rs. 48,667/- in respect of claimant/cross-objector in MFA Crob. 100010/2014, Rs. 51,800/- in respect of claimant/cross-objector in MFA Crob.100011/2014; and Rs. 75,571/- in respect of claimant/cross-objector in respect of MFA Crob. 100012/2014 with interest at 12% p.a., from one month after the date of order. Since the Tractor and Trailer is covered by the insurance, the liability was fastened on the appellant-Insurance Company to compensate the claimants by its judgment and order dated 04-08-2008. The appellant-Insurance Company being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the WCC, fastening the liability on them to compensate the claimants has filed these appeals, whereas the claimants being not satisfied with the interest awarded, one month after the date of order instead of one month after the date of accident, have filed the cross-objections.
Sri. C.V. Angadi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company contended that the judgment and order passed by the WCC is contrary to law. When the policy issued is a Farmer Package Policy, the liability fastened on the insurer is contrary to law. Hence, the Insurer is not liable to compensate the claimants. Further the vehicle is being used for the purpose of transportation of fertilizers and not used for agricultural purposes. Hence the insurer is not liable to pay the compensation and sought for setting aside the judgment and order passed by the WCC by allowing these appeals.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants submits that the issue raised by the appellant-Insurance Company is covered by the judgment of this Court reported in ILR 2011 KAR 4139 in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SRI. MARUTHI AND OTHERS and sought for dismissal of the appeals filed by the Insurance Company in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
On perusal of the judgment reported in ILR 2011 KAR 4139 (supra), the Division Bench of this Court after examining the similar contentions raised by the appellant-Insurance Company, at paragraphs 34, 35 and 36 has held as under:
"34. As of now, there are only two types of policies envisaged under the Standard Forms as contemplated under Section 6 of the Indian Motor Tariff Their liability under the liability only policy and package policy reads as under:
(i) Liability Only Policy : This cover Third Party Liability for bodily injury and/or death and Property Damage Personal Accident cover for Owner. Driver is also included.
(ii) Package Policy: This covers loss or damage to the vehicle insured in addition to (i) above.
By reading the above two types of policies, it is clear package policy is nothing short of comprehensive policy with all the contents almost similar to the comprehensive policy which was in vogue earlier to the introduction of this package policy.
The fully worded policy now produced refers to limits of liability as envisaged in Commercial Vehicles ''B'' Policy (Misc. & special type of vehicles). Section 1 refers to loss of damage to the insured vehicle, tractor-trailer combination; Section-II refers to liability to third parties and Section-III refers to towing disabled vehicle. We are concerned with sub-Section (i) of Section-II which reads as under:
Subject to the limits of liability as laid down in the schedule herein, the company will indemnify the insured against all sums including the claimants costs and expenses which the insured shall become legally liable to pay in respect of death of or bodily injury to any person (including the loading and/or unloading) of the Motor vehicle."
Learned counsel for both the parties submit that the issue raised in these appeals is covered by the judgment referred to above. In view of that, following the aforesaid judgment, the appeals filed by the appellant-Insurance Company are required to be dismissed.
In the cross-objections, the claimants have contended that the interest awarded at the rate of 12% p.a. from one month after the date of order is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Siby George and Others, . Hence, the claimants are entitled for interest from one month after the date of accident and not one month after passing the order. m I find there is a considerable force in the arguments addressed by the cross-objectors. In view of the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court referred to above, the claimants are entitled for the interest from one month after the date of accident. Hence, the judgment and order is required to be modified to that extent and it is to be ordered that the claimants are entitled for interest at the rate of 12%p.a. from one month after the date of accident. Accordingly, I pass the following:
MFA Nos. 21588-21591 of 2009 filed by the Insurance Company stand dismissed. The Cross-objection Nos. 100009 to 100012 of 2014 filed by the claimants are partly allowed. The claimants are entitled to interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from one month after the date of accident.
The amount in deposit is directed to be transmitted to the WCC, sub-Division-I, Bellary.