Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Vishnu Chandra Gupta, J.
National Insurance Company Limited - Appellant
Versus
Asha Pachauri - Respondent
First Appeal From Order No. 1337 of 2010
Decided On : 16-10-2014
Employee's Compensation Act - Relationship between employer and employee - Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 - [EC Act] - [Section 30] - The court discussed the relationship between the employer and the employee, the evidence given in the form of affidavit, and the proof of death of the deceased in the motor accident. The court found that the relationship of employer and employee existed between the deceased and the owner of the vehicle. The court also ruled that the procedure of filing affidavit as examination-in-chief and permitting cross-examination did not cause any prejudice to the opposite party. Additionally, the court held that the Insurance Company failed to establish the breach of the term of the policy, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Praveen Pachauri, died in a motor accident while driving an auto rickshaw under the employment of Neeraj Pachauri. The claimant, Smt. Asha Pachauri, filed for compensation, which was awarded by the Commissioner. The Insurance Company contested the petition, alleging no relationship between the employer and the employee, and disputing the evidence provided.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the relationship of employer and employee existed between the deceased and the owner of the vehicle. The court also ruled that the procedure of filing affidavit as examination-in-chief and permitting cross-examination did not cause any prejudice to the opposite party. Additionally, the court held that the Insurance Company failed to establish the breach of the term of the policy, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Issues: The issues included the relationship between the employer and the employee, the admissibility of evidence in the form of affidavit, and the proof of death of the deceased in the motor accident.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the evidence provided, the legal provisions regarding the relationship between employer and employee, and the burden of proof on the Insurance Company to establish the breach of the policy terms.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the claimant and upholding the award of compensation.
Vishnu Chandra Gupta, J.
1. This appeal under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the EC Act') has been filed against the judgment and award dated 22.09.2010 passed by Workman Compensation Commissioner and Deputy Labour Commissioner, Lucknow Region, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner') in WCP No. 33 of 2008, whereby the Commissioner has awarded compensation of Rs. 3,98,800/- to the claimant Smt. Asha Pachauri on account of death of his son Praveen Pachauri, who died in a mother accident occurred on 18.08.2008 at about 5: 30 a.m., when the deceased was driving auto rickshaw under the employment of respondent no. 2 Neeraj Pachauri, the bother of the deceased.
2. The brief facts for deciding this first appeal from order are that respondent no. 2 Neeraj Pachauri owned an auto rickshaw having Registration No. UP 32-BN 7074. According to him, the auto rickshaw was driven by him in day time and the same was given to the deceased to be driven in between 7: 00 p.m. to 8: 30 a.m. on payment of Rs. 4000/- per month. The deceased was unmarried. The claimant Smt. Asha Pachauri, who is the mother of the deceased Praveen Pachauri, was dependant upon the income of the deceased. Respondent no. 2 Neeraj Pachauri used to reside separately with his mother. On 18.08.2008 at about 5: 30 p.m., when the deceased after taking the passengers from PGI to Charbagh on the auto rickshaw met an accident with an unidentified vehicle near supply depot. Consequently, a fire broken in the front portion of the auto rickshaw. In this incident, the deceased Praveen Pachauri received serious burn injuries and died on the spot along with one passenger of the auto rickshaw, who belongs to Bareilly. In the said accident, all the documents relating to auto rickshaw and the driving license of the deceased along with cash were burnt. A first information report of the said accident was also lodged on the same day by Neeraj Pachauri. The postmortem examination of the deceased was conducted in Lucknow Medical College. The auto rickshaw was admittedly insured on the date of accident with the appellant Insurance Company. The date of birth of Praveen Pachauri was 07.08.1974 and as such, his aged at the time of accident was 34 years.
3. The owner of the auto rickshaw moved an application to the Insurance Company for granting compensation but the appellant Insurance Company vide its letter dated 17.10.2008 informed that as Praveen Pachauri died during the course of his employment, therefore, he may approach to the Commissioner under the provisions of Worksman Compensation Act. Smt. Asha Pachauri moved for compensation to Commissioner where on the basis of structured formula, an amount of Rs. 3,98,800/- has been awarded as compensation in favour of Smt. Asha Pachauri, the mother of the deceased.
4. The petition was contested by the owner of the vehicle admitting the contents in the petition and stated that the vehicle in question was duly insured with the appellant Insurance Company at the time of accident and the same was being driven by the deceased driver, having valid driving license in the course of his employment, therefore, the Insurance Company is bound to pay compensation as claimed by the claimant in terms of the policy.
5. The Insurance Company also filed written statement alleging therein that the story of the alleged employment of the deceased is a cooked up story. There is no contract at all in between the deceased and the respondent no. 2 Neeraj Pachauri. It is a case of hit and run. The driver was not having valid driving license and disowned his liability to pay the compensation.
6. The claimant Smt. Asha Pachauri examined herself as PW 1 and the owner of the vehicle in question was also examined as OPW 1. Apart from it, the claimant filed certified copies of site plan, inquest report of the deceased dated 18.08.2008, first information report, postmortem examination report and Accident/Technical Ex
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
