R. SUBHASH REDDY, J.

( 1 ) WHEN the petition to condone the delay has come up, on the request of both the learned counsel, after condoning the delay, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, itself, is taken up for consideration.

( 2 ) THIS Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, under section 30 of the Workmen s Compensation act, 1923, is filed by the New India Assurance company Limited, aggrieved by the award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen s compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-ll, Hyderbad, in W. C. No. 90 of 2004.

( 3 ) FOR the purpose of convenience, I refer the parties, herein, as arrayed before the tribunal below.

( 4 ) THE applicants have filed claim petition before the Tribunal below, claiming compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- on account of accidental death of the deceased, by name, p. Raghava Rao, on 27-7-2004. As stated in the claim petition, it was the case of the applicants, that the deceased-Raghava Rao was in the employment with OP. No. 1, as cleaner and on 27-7-2004 he died accidentally during the course of employment in view of the accident. It was their case that on the said date, the deceased accompanied in the lorry bearing No. AP. 24v. 2272 as cleaner, from hospet to Gaganpahad, Hyderabad with the load of Iron Muda and after reaching Sunder steel Company, at Gaganpahad, the lorry was parked there. In the meanwhile, the deceased was instructed by the driver to bring tiffin from nearby hotel. The deceased while going to the hotel, was dashed by the lorry bearing No. ATN 67b. 8357 and in the said accident, he suffered grievous injuries and died subsequently. On a complaint to the police, a case in crime No. 510 of 2004 under section 304-A IPC was registered on the file of the Police Station, Rajendranagar. It was the case of the claimants that the deceased was earning Rs. 3,000/- per month and was hale and healthy and was aged about 22 years at the time of accident. Compensation was claimed by impleading the appellant hearing as O. P. No. 2, who was the insurer of the lorry bearing No. AP. 24v. 2272.

( 5 ) BOTH the opposite parties, before the tribunal below, contested the proceedings. I n the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of O. P. No. 1-owner of the vehicle, he has admitted narration of the facts as stated by the applicants, but however, pleaded, as much as the vehicle was insured, vide Policy no. 610902/31/03/5812, which was valid from 9-1-2004 to 8-1-2005, if at all any compensation is payable, he is not liable to pay any compensation. The appellant-O. P. No. 2 has also contested the matter before the Tribunal by filing counter affidavit. It was the case of the O. P. No. 2 that there was no employee and employer relationship between the deceased and O. P. No. 1; as such, they are not liable for payment of compensation. Further, pleading that the componsation claimed was excessive and exorbitant, sought for dismissal of the claim petition.

( 6 ) HAVING regard to the pleadings on record, the Tribunal below framed the following issues for trial: (1) Whether the deceased met with an accident on 2/-/-2004 as a cleaner on the lorry bearing No. AP. 24v. 2272 which arose out of and in course of his employment with the 1st Opp. Party and sustained injuries resulting his death? (2) Who are liable to pay compensation? and (3) What is the amount of compensation entitled by the applicants?

( 7 ) TO prove the claim, on behalf of the applicants, second applicant was examined as P. W. 1 and Exs. A-1 to A-7 were marked on their behalf. On behalf of the Opposite Parties, neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced.

( 8 ) WITH reference to the pleadings and evidence on record, the Tribunal below has recorded the finding that the deceased died during the course of employment with the o. P. No. 1 and, though it was the plea of the applicants that the deceased was earning rs. 3,000/- per month, in absence of any clear evidence to that effect, the Tribunal below has taken the notified minimum wages for the cleaners under th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document