Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 18409
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946 MFA (ECC) NO. 41 OF 2017 ECC NO.503 OF 2014 OF EMPLOYEE'S COMPENSATION COMMISSIONER, KOZHIKODE APPELLANT/2ND OPPOSITE PARTY IN ECC 503/2014 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SILVER PLAZA BUILDING, I.G
ROAD, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS.
LAL GEORGE SEBASTIAN VARGHESE(K/141/2000) RESPONDENTS/APPLICANTS/1ST RESPONDENT IN ECC 503/2014 1 BHANUMATHY N.
W/O LATE. HARINDRANATH, AGED 42 YEARS, NAMBILATH HOUSE, PO.CHULOOR, NIT,KOZHIKODE- 673601. 2 ATHUL, S/O LATE HARINDRANATH, AGED 18 YEARS,NAMBILATH HOUSE, P.O. CHULOOR, NIT,KOZHIKODE. 673601. 3 RAHUL AGED 21 YEARS, S/O LATE. HARINDRANATH, NAMBILATH HOUSE, P.O. CHULOOR, NIT,KOZHIKODE 673601. 4 THANKAMANI AMMA, AGED 72, M/O LATE HARINDRANATH, NAMBILATH HOUSE,P.O.CHULOOR,NIT, KOZHIKODE. 673601. 5 MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT COMPANY, COMPANY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695023. BY ADVS.
A.V.M.SALAHUDIN SRI.P.C.CHACKO, SC, KSRTC P.C.SASIDHARAN SHRI.T.P SAJAN THIS MFA (ECC) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.03.2024, THE COURT ON 27.3.2024, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------- M.F.A (ECC) 41 of 2017 ----------------------------- Dated : 27th March, 2024
Employer's liability under the Employee's Compensation Act requires a causal connection between the employee's death and their employment, considering the physical and mental stress and strain of the job.
Headnote:
Employer's Liability - Employee's Compensation - The court confirmed the finding of the Employee's Compensation Commissioner that the deceased's death arose out of and in the course of his employment as a driver of a bus, dismissing the appeal filed by the insurance company.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, a bus driver, died due to cardiac arrest while preparing to return to work after an overnight journey. His dependents claimed compensation, which was awarded by the Employee's Compensation Commissioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court confirmed the finding of the Employee's Compensation Commissioner that the deceased's death arose out of and in the course of his employment as a driver of a bus, dismissing the appeal filed by the insurance company.
Issues: Dispute over whether the deceased's death was an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, leading to the appeal by the insurance company.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the causal connection between the deceased's death and his employment, emphasizing the physical and mental stress and strain of the driver's job, and relied on previous decisions to support the finding.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, confirming the finding of the Employee's Compensation Commissioner and upholding the awarded compensation.
1. This is an appeal filed by M/s, New India Assurance Company Ltd. Namely, the 2nd respondent in ECC.No.503 of 2014 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal and Compensation Commissioner, Kozhikode against the order dated 12.08.2016.
2. The applicants, who are the dependents of one Harindranath, who died while working as driver of a bus belonging to the 1st respondent, namely the KSRTC. The deceased Harindranath was the driver of KSRTC Bus bearing Registration No.KL 15- 9602. On 12.10.2012, he had driven the said bus from Kozhikode to Banglore and reached Banglore in the morning of 13.10.2012. As per the schedule, he had to return from Banglore to Kozhikode during the night of 13.10.2012. At about 8 p.m., while he along with the conductor of the bus were cleaning the same for preparing to return from Banglore to Kozhikode, he sustained serious chest pain. Immediately he was taken to a nearby hospital and on the way, he died due to cardiac arrest.
3. The applicants, who are the wife, children and mother of the deceased filed an application before the Commissioner, claiming a compensation of Rs.10 Lakhs on the ground that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs.15,000/-. The 1st respondent KSRTC admitted that the deceased was working as driver in the KSRTC Bus at the relevant time and further contended that the vehicle was insured with the appellant namely, M/s. New India Assurance Company Ltd. 4. The appellant appeared and admitted the insurance policy. However, they denied the liability on the ground that the deceased died not due to any accident out of and in the course of employment.
Rejecting the above contention of the appellant, the Employee's Compensation Commissioner awarded a compensation of Rs.6,25,880/- along with interest @ 12% per annum as well as a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. Aggrieved by the above order, the Insurance Company preferred this appeal raising various contentions.
5. It was argued on behalf of the appellant that the deceased, at the time of incident was not actually working as driver. It was contended that the deceased sustained chest pain after his onward journey to Banglore was completed and before the return journey commenced.
Therefore, it was argued that the death was not due to any accident which arose out of and in the course of employment. Therefore, the learned counsel for the appellant prayed for allowing the appeal and to set aside the impugned order as against the appellant.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents would argue that the duty of the deceased commenced in the morning on 12.10.2012 and he was supposed to return back by driving the bus to Kozhikode on 13.10.2012, during night, when the untoward incident occurred. Therefore, the respondents would argue that the deceased was on duty at the time of incident and the award passed by the Employee's Compensation Commissioner is perfectly valid and hence they prayed for dismissing the appeal.
7. As I have already noted above, the 2nd respondent KSRTC would admit that the deceased was working as driver of the KSRTC bus at the time of incident. It is also admitted that at the time of the incident, the deceased was on duty in the said bus. The above fact was not disputed by the appellant also. Now the question to be considered is whether the above death was an accident which arose out of and in the course of the employment.
8. The widow of the deceased as AW1 has adduced evidence before the Employees Compensation Commissioner to the effect that on 12.10.2012, the deceased was on duty in the KSRTC Bus in the route Kozhikodoe – Banglore and on 13.10.2012, while he was preparing to return back to Kozhikode, he sustained chest pain. He was immediately taken to a nearby hospital and he died due to cardiac arrest. According to her, the deceased happened to die due to the stress and strain arose out of the pressure of work.
9. In the report filed by the conductor it is stated that at the time of
