Back
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
PANKAJ PUROHIT
Dev Bhoomi Construction Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Bhakti Ram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Pankaj Purohit, J.
This Appeal from Order has been preferred under Section 30 (1) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 1923”), assailing the judgment and award dated 18.06.2012 passed by the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Tehri Garhwal, New Tehri in Claim Petition No.15 of 2009, whereby the claim petition filed by respondent no.1 was allowed and compensation of Rs.5,46,560/- along with simple interest at 10 per cent per annum, payable upon failure to deposit the amount within thirty days, was awarded against the present appellant–owner of the vehicle. The appellant seeks setting aside of the judgment on the grounds that the liability ought to have been fastened upon the insurer and that various findings of the learned Commissioner suffers from errors of law and fact.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the claimant, Bhakti Ram, filed a petition on 11.11.2009 asserting that his son, Manish Kumar, aged about 22 years, was employed as a driver of Vehicle No.UA- 07R-8179, owned by the present appellant and insured with respondent no.2. It was submitted that in the intervening night of 20/21 March 2009, at about 01:30 A.M., the
Owner solely liable for workmen's compensation when permitting LMV-licensed driver without valid HMV licence to operate heavy vehicle, absolving insurer due to attributable policy breach; appeal dism....
An employer may be held vicariously liable when an employee operates a vehicle without a valid license, negating insurer liability in case of substantive policy breach.
The employer's responsibility to ensure a valid driving license for the vehicle operator is critical; a lack of such validation can relieve the insurer from liability under the insurance policy.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the burden of proof on the Insurance Company to establish that the deceased did not possess a valid driving licence and the application of the prin....
The validity of the driving license is a consideration under a contract of insurance, and the insurer can raise the issue in the proceedings under the Employees Compensation Act.
The insurance company is not liable for compensation if the driver lacked a valid driving licence at the time of the accident.
The insurance company is liable for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act when an employee-employer relationship is established, regardless of the driver's licensing status or the nature ....
The onus is on the insurance company to prove the lack of a valid driving license for the deceased employee.
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
