APHC010384612009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL Between: The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Kadapa. Dasari Guru Devi and Others Counsel for the Appellant: 1. NARESH BYRAPANENI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. J SESHAGIRI RAO The Court made the following: 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1209 OF 2009 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Kadapa. AND Dasari Guru Devi and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant: NARESH BYRAPANENI Counsel for the Respondent(S): following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3460] FRIDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 2009 ...APPELLANT ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1209 OF 2009 JUDGMENT: 1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act, questioning the Order dated 27.11.2008 in W.C.No.2 of 2007 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Kadapa. 2. The facts in brief of the appellant are as follows: One Mr. Dasari Pullaiah (herein after referred to as ‘deceased’), who was working as coolie to the Tractor and Trailer bearing Registration Nos. AP 27 U 3735 and APL 4690 owned by Opposite Party-I. The said vehicle was insured with Opposite Party-II. While so, on 25.12.2004, the deceased along with one Mr. Venkataramana going in the Tractor-Trailer from Jammalamadugu for taking dry hay from Suddapalli Village. At about 7.00 p.m, when the vehicle reached near B.T.Padu on Jammalamadugu – Allagadda main road, the driver of the vehicle lost control and the tractor fell in the pit on the road side. In the said accident, the deceased was sustained grievous injuries and immediately he was shifted to Government Hospital, Jammalamadugu, where he was declared dead. 3. As the accident occurred in the course of employment and as the vehicle was insured with Opposite Party-II/ Insurance Company vide Policy No.611204/31/04/00818 valid from 08.09.2004 to 07.09.2005 covering the risk 3 of coolies, the claim application for compensation was filed by the wife, two minor daughters and parents of the deceased. A case was registered by the Pedda Mudiam Police in Crime No. 85 of 2004 on the complaint of one Venkataramana for the offences under Section 337 and 304-A IPC against the driver and Opposite Party-I. 4. The Opposite Party-I i.e owner/ employer did not file any counter and remained exparte. 5. Opposite Party-II/ Insurance Company has filed counter disputing the ownership of Opposite Party-I and that one Mr. M. Jani was the owner of the tractor and one Mr. S. Satyam was the owner of the trailer. Therefore, a defence was raised that the application is bad for non joinder of necessary parties. It was also pleaded that no premium was paid to cover the risk of passengers/ coolies and that the vehicle supposed to be used for agricultural purpose only but not for commercial purpose. As accident occurred while the vehicle was used for commercial purposes, no liability can be fastened on the Insurance Company. 6. On the basis of pleadings, the Commissioner framed the following issues : 1. Whether the deceased was a workman as per the provisions of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 and she met with accident arising out of and in course of his employment resulting into death. 2. What was the age of the deceased at the time of the accident? 4 3. What were the wages paid to the deceased workman at the time of accident? 4. What is the amount of compensation payable? 5. Who are liable to pay the compensation? 7. On behalf of claimants, wife of the deceased herself examined as AW-1 and she reiterated the averments made in the claim application and sought for compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/-. In support of their claim, Exs.A1 to A3 were marked i.e Certified copies of FIR, Inquest Report and Postmortem Certificate of deceased. On behalf of Opposite Party-II/ Insurance Company, RW-1 was examined i.e Assistant Manager and Exs. B1 to B3 were marked i.e attested copy of Policy, Copy of B-Register relating to tractor and trailer. 8. The Commissioner, after taking into consideration of the oral and documentary evidence came to a conclusion that the accident occurred in the course of employment and that Opposite Party-I as well as Insurance Company are jointly and severally responsible and liable to pay compensation to the claimants. The wage of the deceased was fixed at Rs. 2,568-75 paise as per Minimum Wages Act and fixed quantum of compensation at Rs.2,56,104/- . Aggrieved by the same, the present Appeal came to be filed. 9. Heard Sri Naresh Byrapaneni, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri J. Seshagiri Rao, learned counsel for the respondents 4 and 5. 10. The only ground urged by the learned counsel for the appellant contended that the vehicle was stands in the name of third parties and not in favour of Opposite Party-I and therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable 5 to pay compensation. The learned counsel for the respondent contended that the Insurance Policy stands in the name of Opposite Party-I and the Insurance Company cannot be exonerated. This Court examined the Insurance Policy (Ex.B1) and the policy was issued in the name of the Opposite Party No.1/ Respondent No.6 with reference to the vehicle involved in the accident. As per the said Ex.B1/ Policy, workmen compensation premium was also paid to cover the liability of one employee, apart from T.P basic. As requisite Insurance premium was paid to both tractor and trailer covering liability under workmen compensation to one employee, this Court is not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Commissioner. 11. Accordingly, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is therefore dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. 12. As the accident pertains to the year 2004 and considering the uncertain addresses of the claimants and the delay of over 20 years, the State Legal Services Authority shall co-ordinate with the concerned departments to know the whereabouts of claimants and ensure that the compensation is paid directly in to their Aadhaar linked bank accounts with accrued interest. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 14.02.2025 KK 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1209 OF 2009 14.02.2025 7 KK