Reliance General Insurance Company Limited vs Smt. Samshira and Others

Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.

CM No. 16431-CII of 2013

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

FAO No. 2791 of 2013 (O & M)

Vide order dated 27.07.2011, the Commissioner, Mewat under the Employee''s Compensation Act, 1923 has awarded compensation in favour of respondents No. 1 to 10 on account of death of one Mubarik, who died during the course of employment with respondent No. 1 (i.e. respondent No. 11 herein). Vide the aforesaid order, the Commissioner, Mewat has found that the said employee was insured by the appellant-Company, and therefore, the appellant-Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation amount, as determined by the said authority.

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant-Company challenging the aforesaid order of the Commissioner on the ground that there was no relationship of employer and employee between respondent No. 11 and the deceased.

At this stage, it may further be noticed that respondent No. 11, in its written statement, has admitted that Mubarik (since deceased) was employed with the said Company and his salary was Rs. 6,000. The appellant-Company, in its written statement though admitted the factum of insurance of respondent No. 11, but denied the claim of the claimants raising various objections. However, it is a matter of record that all the witnesses of the claimants in equivocal terms have stated that Mubarik was working with respondent No. 11 as a driver.

Despite the fact that the appellant had filed written statement and has raised an issue with regard to relationship of employer and employee between respondent No. 11 and the deceased, yet no evidence has been brought on record by the appellant-Insurance Company in this regard. In view of the aforesaid fact, the contention raised on behalf of the appellant-Company before the Authority below was rejected.

Even before this Court, the aforesaid findings could not be controverted by the appellant-Insurance Company by pointing out any material on record to the contrary. In fact, no effort has been made by the appellant-Insurance Company to controvert the stand taken by the claimants and the respondent-Company. In view thereof, the appeal filed by the appellant-Insurance Company is wholly without any merit and is liable to be dismissed.

Ordered accordingly.

CM No. 12668-CII of 2013

At this stage, it may further be noticed that there is a delay of 607 days in filing the appeal. Though an affidavit has been filed on behalf of the appellant-Company to explain the reasons causing such a huge delay in filing the appeal; however, a perusal of the affidavit of Sanpreet Pahuja, Manager, Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. would show that no explanation is forthcoming as to why after receiving a certified copy of the order in question, the appellant-Company has taken a considerable time for getting approval of the headquarter for filing the instant appeal. Simply because the appellant has to go through many channels before the approval could be granted, will not be a ground to condone the delay, as it is well settled that administrative exigencies cannot be made a basis for condoning delay.

In view thereof, even the prayer for condonation of such a huge delay in filing the appeal is also rejected. The application stands dismissed accordingly.