AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dalip Singh, J.—Though this appeal has been listed from defect side as there is a delay in filing the appeal, learned Counsel for the appellant has been heard so far as the merits of the appeal are concerned.
Learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that as per the insurance policy, the premium had been taken only in respect of the driver whereas the deceased was a helper and, therefore, the insurance company was not bound to reimburse the employer and pay the compensation to the claimants.
So far as the aforesaid contention is concerned, it is not in dispute that in the policy in question (Exhibit NA-1) all that has been stated therein is that the premium has been charged by the Insurance Company on account of workmen compensation liability. The Insurance Company in the policy has not specified that this premium is being charged only so as to meet the requirement of liability in case of the driver of vehicle.
In that view of the matter when the Insurance Company has not specified or limited the liability under the policy with regard to the liability for workmen compensation only in the case of the driver of vehicle, the Insurance Company cannot take the plea that helper who was a workman and employed by the employer insured is not covered by the terms of the policy.
In the facts and circumstances, therefore, there being no merit in the appeal, no substantial question of law arises, the appeal itself is dismissed. The application for stay and the application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act also stands dismissed.