Back
C. M. POONACHA
Tata Aig General Insurance Co Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Pramoda Chandra Sarkar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
The above appeal is filed by the insurer challenging the judgment dated 03.03.2016 passed in ECA.No.70/2014 in the file of XXI Additional Small Causes Judge and The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (SCCH-23), Bengaluru[Hereinafter referred as 'Tribunal'].
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred as per their rank before the Tribunal.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that on 24.05.2012 one Paresh Sarkar[Hereinafter referred as 'Deceased'] was working as a unskilled worker at the project site Manthri Espana, under the Respondent No.1 when in the course of his employment, he slipped and fell down, as a result of which he sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same. Claiming compensation for the death of the deceased, the Petitioners filed a petition under Section 10 of the Employers Compensation Act[Hereinafter referred as 'Act'] arraying the employer as Respondent No.1 and the insurer as Respondent No.2.
4. The petitioners were the parents, brother and sister of the deceased. The employer and the insurer entered appearance before the Tribunal and filed their statement of objections. The petitioner No.1 was examined as PW.1. Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.9 w
The insurance company is not liable for interest payments under the Workmen's Compensation Act; liability rests with the employer to pay compensation and associated interest.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the insurance policy terms and the extent of the insurance company's liability under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
The burden of proof and the retrospective application of amended provisions of the Act were the central legal points established in the judgment.
Employer's liability to pay as per Commissioner's award and the same varied between wages actually drawn by deceased employee and wages shown by employer as payable to employee for purpose of payment....
Point of Law : Objective of amendment was to remove a deeming cap on monthly income of an employee and extend to them compensation on basis of actual monthly wages drawn by them, however, there was n....
An insurer is not liable for interest on compensation awarded under the Employees Compensation Act if the policy expressly excludes such liability.
Section 4 of Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923, existed when unfortunate accident took place.
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
