The New India Assurance Company Ltd v. Smt. Reena Devi and Others

Court No. - 2 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1571 of 2007 Appellant :- The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Respondent :- Smt. Reena Devi And Others Counsel for Appellant :- S.C. Srivastava Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

¶2The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the award dated 30.03.2007 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation/Assistant Labour Commissioner, Moradabad in Case W.C.A. No.37 of 2006

¶3Challenging the said award, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the finding of the Commissioner that the deceased was employed as labour on the offending truck i.e. H.R. 55/3506 is perverse and illegal inasmuch as the owner of the offending truck filed written statement and denied the employment of the deceased. Accordingly, it is submitted that the Commissioner has erred in entertaining the claim petition and passing the award against the appellant Insurance Company. It is lastly urged that the Commissioner has erred in law in awarding the interest.

¶4Be that as it may, the employment was proved by the claimant-respondent inasmuch as the claimant appeared before the Commissioner and stated on oath that the deceased was employed on the offending truck.Though, the owner has denied the factum of employment in the written statement but the owner did not appear before the Commissioner and proved the assertions made in the written statement.

¶5Since, there was no evidence on record in rebuttal to the testimony of claimant-respondent proving employment of the deceased on the offending truck, therefore, finding of the Commissioner on the issue of employment is based upon proper appreciation of facts and evidence on record, and does not warrant any interference by this Court.

¶6So far as the submission of learned counsel for the appellant with respect to interest is concerned, the said contention is also misconceived inasmuch as under Section 4-A of the Workmen's Compensation Act, the Commissioner has power to grant interest. In such view of the fact, the contention advanced in respect to interest is also misconceived, and is rejected.

¶7Thus, for the reasons given above, the appeal lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed with no order as to costs. Order Date :- 28.10.2023 NS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad