High CourtsSingle Bench(2023) 06 MP CK 0025

New India Assurance Comp.Ltd vs Kamta Prasad And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 12 June 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vivek Agarwal, J
RESULT
Allowed/Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 2339 Of 2004

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 400 words

Vivek Agarwal, J

This appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 being aggrieved of award dated 29.3.2004 passed by learned Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act Labour Court, Sagar in Case No.17/99/WC Fatal on the ground that deceased Devendra Kumar Raikwar was aged about 16 years and, therefore, he was not entitled to drive Jeep No.MP15-W-0463, which was owned by Saligram and Smt.Kamla Bai and the aforesaid has been overlooked by the Labour Court. Though it has come in the evidence of Claimant Witness that his son studied upto Class-VI and on the date of the accident, his age was 16 years, yet overlooking this evidence, the compensation has been awarded in his favour. The driving licence, which was produced, is a fake one and, therefore, no exhibit was marked over it. The accident took place on 1.7.1998. No date of birth is mentioned in the so called driving licence. When the deceased studied upto Class-VI then his mark sheet could have been produced to verify his date of birth and to ascertain as to whether he was major on the date of the accident or not.

Since no mark sheet is produced and there is admission that at the time of the death, deceased Devendra Kumar Raikwar was 16 years of age as is mentioned in the postmortem report also, the Labour Court erred in considering him to be a workman and awarding compensation in favour of the claimants and against the Insurance Company.

As far as the compensation is concerned, if the owners of the offending vehilce employed a minor then then cannot aspect from their liability and when this fact is taken into consideration then the direction of the Labour Court to the Insurance Company to pay the amount of compensation and make recovery from the owners of the offending vehicle cannot be faulted with especially in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Pappuu & Others versus Vinod Kumar Lamba & Another (2018) 3 SCC 208 and, therefore, it is directed that the Insurance Company shall stand exonerated. However, the Insurance Company will pay the compensation in favour of the claimants and will be entitled to recover the same from the owners of the offending vehicle.

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and disposed of in above terms.

Let record of the Labour Court, if any, be sent back.