Back
NYAPATHY VIJAY
P. Krishnaiah Naidu – Appellant
Versus
P. Nagamani – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NYAPATHY VIJAY, J.
1. The present appeal is filed under section 30 of Employees Compensation Act, questioning the order in W.C.No.06 of 2003 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Tirupati dated 21.02.2005.
2. The parties are referred to as per their nomenclature before the Commissioner.
3. The facts leading to this appeal are as under:
One P.Vara Prasad was employed as a driver by O.P.No.1 in lorry bearing No.ADC-1859. On 20.02.2002, while the deceased was driving the lorry, collided with KSRTC Bus bearing No.KA 01 F-7167 near Medarimitta on Bangalore Vijayawada road and as a result of the accident, the deceased driver died on the spot. The Medarimitta P.S., registered a case under Section 304-A and section 337 I.P.C., in Crime No.5 of 2002 against the driver of KSRTC Bus. The father of the deceased filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- as the deceased was employed by Opposite Party No.1 on a monthly salary of Rs.4,000/- with batta at Rs.100/- per day. In the claim application, the policy number of the vehicle was specifically mentioned as 051601/31/01/64268.
4. The O.P.No.1 refused to receive notic
The appellate court can receive additional evidence under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, emphasizing the insurance company's duty to produce relevant documents for fair adjudication.
The appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act is limited to substantial questions of law, and the Commissioner’s findings on facts are final unless proven perverse.
The insurance policy under the Workmen’s Compensation Act covers employees, including second drivers, affirming their entitlement to compensation for work-related injuries.
The court upheld the Commissioner's compensation award, emphasizing that reasonable estimates for salary are acceptable in the absence of documentary evidence.
Familial relationships do not negate employer-employee status if remuneration is involved; the burden of proof lies with the insurance company regarding the absence of a valid driving license.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of disputed liability, the party should be granted an opportunity to lead evidence and cross-examine to prevent a miscarriage of j....
The insurer's attempt to contest liability on an unproven technical ground regarding policy coverage was rejected, affirming that established liability under the Employees’ Compensation Act must be h....
It was for claimant to have opted for claim of compensation either under Workmen’s Compensation Act or under Motor Vehicles Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
