FAO-1094-1999 [216] [1] National In Hawa Sing [2] Hawa Sing M/s Deepak Tehsil and Coram : Present: PANKAJ J [1] order dated Compensat [2] Commissio in an accid the workma Reg machin 1999 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT CHANDIGA FAO-1094 Date of De nal Insurance Company Limited versus Singh and another FAO-605 a Singh versus Deepak Woolen Mills, Village Kohand il and District Karnal and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PA Mr. Amit Jaiswal, Advocate fo in FAO-1094-1999 and for res in FAO-605-2000. None for the appellant in FAO Mr. Rajinder Goel, Advocate **** KAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) Claimant as well as Insurance r dated 25.03.1999 passed by the C pensation Act, 1923. The workman-claimant filed missioner seeking compensation on a accident arising out of and during th orkman, he was employed with M/s D machine. On 09.10.1995, while he w T OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH 1094-1999 (O&M) of Decision : 30.04.2026 …Appellant ….Respondents 605-2000 (O&M) …Appellant ohand, ….Respondents PANKAJ JAIN cate for the appellant for respondent No.2 FAO-605-2000. vocate for respondent No.1. rance Company is in appeal against th the Commissioner under Workmen t filed an application before th on account of injury suffered by hi ring the course of employment. As p M/s Deepak Woolen Mills to work o e he was on duty, his right arm came 1 ainst the rkmen’s ore the by him As per work on came in RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document FAO-1094-1999 threshing Medical ex permanentl disablemen [3] filed writ Responden pleading th [4] compensati period com actual reali [5] enhanceme Insurance C [6] assailed the employer d not have al that as per amounts to have awar He further accident. Company 1999 (O&M) machine. While putting reg, h experts opined that he has suffere anently. He thus sought compens lement suffered by him. The claim was contested by written statements denying e ondent No.2-Insurance Company den ing that no notice regarding the accide The Commissioner, vide ensation of ₹1,12,402/- along with i d commencing from 30 days after t l realization. FAO-605-2000 is at the be ncement of compensation. FAO ance Company, disputing its liability t Mr. Amit Jaiswal, counsel f led the order passed by the Commissi oyer denied employer-employee relat ave allowed the application filed by t as per Part No.2 of Schedule I appen nts to 60% permanent disability and t awarded compensation to the workm rther submits that the cover note was ent. Accident occurred at the sam pany cannot be held liable to indemni , his hand was crushed up to wris suffered disability to the extent of 65% mpensation for the injuries and th ed by the respondents. The employ ing employer-employee relationshi denied liability to pay compensatio accident was served upon them. vide impugned order, awarde with interest @ 6% per annum for th after the date of award till the date o the behest of the workman seekin FAO-1094-1999 is at the behest o bility to pay compensation. nsel for the Insurance Company, ha missioner by submitting that once th e relationship, the Commissioner oug d by the workman. He further submi appended to 1923 act, loss of a han y and thus the Commissioner ought n workman taking his disability as 65% e was issued at 4:30 PM on the date o e same time and thus the Insuranc demnify the employer. 2 to wrist. 65% nd the mployer ionship. ensation awarded for the date of seeking hest of , has once the r ought submits hand ught not as 65%. date of surance RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document FAO-1094-1999 [7] Company cannot be [8] Narain Sin to submit crippled fo compensati Further sub mandate an [9] through rec [10] in a machi Pure findin circumstanc findings of [11] consideratio permanent laid down (supra), ob 1999 (O&M) Per contra, Mr. Goel, woul pany accepted the premium and issued ot be absolved of its liability to indemn Counsel for the claimant relie in Singh Deo versus Srinivas Sabata bmit that a workman having lost h led for his entire life. The Comm ensation on the basis of functional dis er submits that the interest has not b ate and no order qua penalty has been I have heard counsel for the gh records of the case. It stands proved on record tha machine within the factory premises findings of fact have been recorded mstances, this Court finds that the Co of fact in favour of the workman. The issue with respect to aw ideration, the functional disability anent disability suffered by injured w down by the Supreme Court in ‘Pr ), observing as under:- “5. The expression "total in section 2(i) (1) of the Act as fo "(1) "total disablement" mean temporary or permanent nature, would submit that once the Insuranc issued cover note, Insurance Compan ndemnify the employer. t relies upon the judgment in ‘Pra abata’, reported as 1976 (1) SCC 28 lost his right hand has been rendere Commissioner ought to have assesse nal disability suffered by the workma not been awarded as per the statutor s been passed. or the parties and have carefully gon rd that the workman lost his right han mises owned by respondent-employe orded by the Commissioner. In thes the Commissioner has rightly recorde kman. to award of compensation taking in bility of the workman on the basis o ured workman has been authoritative Pratap Narain Singh Deo’s cas tal disablement" has been defin as follows:- eans such disablement, whether of ture, as incapacitates a workman for a 3 surance pany Pratap CC 289, endered assessed orkman. tatutory lly gone hand ployer. In these ecorded ing into basis of itatively ’s case, efined of a for all RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document FAO-1094-1999 [12] Suresh ve reported as [13] Commissio consideratio and ignorin livelihood b 100% func 1999 (O&M) work which he was capable of p resulting in such disablement." that the injury was of such disablement to the respondent, a whether the disablement incapa which he was capable of perform Commissioner has examined the as follows: " The injured workman in this loss of the left hand above the el unfit for the work of carpenter done by one hand only." This is obviously a reasonable an The same has been further fo versus Oriental Insurance Com rted as (2010) 13 SCC 777, observing “8. In our view, the ratio applicable to the facts at hand. W of amputation of his right leg belo work of a driver,which he was pe resulting in the said disablement. earning capacity as a lorry drive from even getting a driving licence In view thereof, this Court is o missioner erred in awarding compe ideration the permanent disability as ignoring the functional disability. ihood by physical labour having lost functionally disabled. Thus, the of performing at the time of the accide nt." It has not been disputed before ch a nature as to cause permane nt, and the question for consideration capacitated the respondent for all wo rforming at the time of the accident. T d the question and recorded his findin this case is carpenter by profession....B e elbow, he has evidently been render ter as the work of carpentry cannot le and correct finding.” ther followed by Supreme Court in e Company Limited and another rving as under:- atio of the said judgment is square . We are of the opinion that on accou below knee, he is rendered unfit for t s performing at the time of the accide ent. Therefore, he has lost 100% of h river, more so, when he is disqualifi ence under the Motor Vehicles Act.” urt is of the considered opinion that compensation by merely taking in ity as assessed by the medical exper bility. The workman, who earns h g lost his right hand has been rendere the compensation needs to be r 4 cident ore us anent tion is l work t. The inding n....By ndered not be rt in ‘S. other’, uarely ccount for the cident of his alified that the g into experts arns his endered be re- RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document FAO-1094-1999 calculated a [14] dispute tha Company 09.10.1995 Insurance compensati Judges Ben Chandmul wherein the 1999 (O&M) lated as under:- 1000 x 60 / 100 x 192.14 = 1,1 Counsel for the Insurance Co te that the cover note was issued pany. Thus, the contract of insuranc .1995. Thus, the contract of insuranc .1995. It is nobody’s case that the acc ance Company cannot be absolve ensation to indemnify the employer es Bench Judgment in ‘General Ass dmull Jain and another’, reported ein the Supreme Court observed as und “xxx xxx xxx A contract of insurance is a spe there is a well-established comm even prior to the completion o proposal is being considered delivery. A cover note is a temp be self-contained or it may inco conditions of the future policy. W policy in this manner, it does conditions, but merely to refer to proposal is for a standard polic assured is taken to have acce reference to the policy and expressed in the proposal or the acceptance including the cover n and conditions of the policy ma references, in two or more docu Documents like the proposal, commercial documents and to in 1,15,284/- nce Company is not in a position ssued at 04:30 PM by the Insuranc surance was concluded at 4:30 PM o the accident occurred prior thereto. Th bsolved of its liability to pay th ployer. Reference can be made to al Assurance Society Limited vers orted as 1966 SCC OnLine SC 20 as under:- species of commercial transactions h commercialpractice to send cover not on of a proper proposal or while t red or a policy is in preparation f emporary and limited agreement. It m incorporate by reference the terms a cy. When the cover note incorporates t does not have to recite the term an fer to a particular standard policy. If t olicy and the cover note refers to it, t accepted the terms of that policy. T nd its terms and conditions may r the cover note or even in the letter ver note. The incorporation of the term y may also arise from a combination documents passing between the partie osal, cover note and the policy a to interpret them commercial habits 5 ition to surance PM on The pay the de to 5 versus SC 208, ns had notes ile the on for It may s and tes the m and . If the it, the y. The ay be tter of erms tion of arties. y are and RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document FAO-1094-1999 [15] which is in of the 192 1999 (O&M) practice cannot altogether be i note operates, the relations of th and conditions, if any, but more of the policy bargained for and terms of the policy are incipien cover, the relations are governed the policy unless insurance is d issuing the policy makes no dif governed by the future policy indication that it would be so. In between a contract of insurance in a contract of insurance there i.e., good faith on the part of the be construed contra proferentem of ambiguity or doubt. A con unqualified acceptance of th expressed in writing or it may e the premium and retains it. In th on his part by which he recogn amounts to an affirmation of it. T by the assured himself, because the time of the cover notes, that him before that period had exp time. In interpreting documents the duty of the court is to interpr expressed by the parties because contract, however reasonable, themselves. Looking at the propo cover notes, it is clear that a standard policy for fire and ext had come into being.” The Commissioner however h is in teeth of the statutory mandate a e 1923 Act. Thus, workman is held be ignored. During the time the cov s of the parties are governed by its term ore usually by the terms and conditio and to be issued. When this happens t ipient but after the period of tempora rned only by the terms and conditions is declined in the meantime. Delay difference. The relations even then a licy if the cover notes give sufficie so. In other respects there is no differen ance and any other contract except th here is a requirement of uberrima fid f the assured and the contract is likely ntem that is against the company in ca contract is formed when there is f the proposal. Acceptance may ay even be implied if the insurer accep In the case of the assured, a positive a cognises or seeks to enforce the poli . This position was clearly recognise ause he wrote, close upon the expiry that either a policy should be issued expired or the cover note extended ents relating to a contract of insuranc terpret the words in which the contract ause it is not for the court to make a ne ble, if the parties have not made roposal, the letter of acceptance and t at a contract, of insurance under t extended to cover flood, cyclone, et ever erred in awarding 6% intere date as contemplated under Section 4 is held entitled to interest @ 12% p 6 cover s terms ditions ns the porary ions of lay in en are fficient erence pt that a fides kely to n case is an ay be ccepts ive act policy gnised piry of sued to ded in rance, tract is a new ade it nd the er the e, etc., interest tion 4A 2% per RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document FAO-1094-1999 annum for date of actu [16] 30% of the the penalty [17] disposed o [18] disposed of [19] 30.04.2026 ‘R. Sharma' 1999 (O&M) m for the period commencing from 3 of actual realization. The workman is also held e of the awarded compensation along w enalty along with interest shall be born With the aforesaid modificatio sed off. All pending miscellaneous ed off. Photocopy of this order be plac .2026 Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable from 30 days after the accident till th eld entitled for penalty which shall b along with interest. The liability to pa e borne by the employer. ifications in the order, the appeals a neous application(s), if any, stand be placed on the file of connected case (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No 7 t till the shall be y to pay eals are stands d case. RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.08 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document