APHC010677152014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL Between: United India Insurance Co Ltd AkulaBullemma and Others Counsel for the Appellant 1. PENUMAKA VENKATA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K V SUBRAHMANYA NARUSU The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 231/2014 United India Insurance Co Ltd AND AkulaBullemma and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Appellant: PENUMAKA VENKATA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): K V SUBRAHMANYA NARUSU The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3460] TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY NO: 231/2014 ...APPELLANT ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 231 of 2014 JUDGMENT: The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the order dated 29.09.2012 in W.C.No.12 of 2009 passed by the Commissioner of Workmen’s Compensation & Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Gudiwada. 2. The facts leading to filing of the present Appeal are as follows:- One Sri Akula Nageswara Rao (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) was working as a driver to a bus bearing registration No.AP16-TV-4723 owned by O.P.No.1. On 05.12.2008, while he was on duty, he taken the bus from his house to the destination and proceeding towards Nuzividu road, the deceased fell in the bus. On being informed the same, the claimant No.2 i.e., the son of the deceased immediately came to the spot and shifted his father to nearer hospital, where RMP doctor immediately attended on him and on his advice, while shifting to another hospital for better treatment, the deceased died enroute. 3. The claimant No.2 gave a report to the police about the incident and the same was registered as FIR in Crime No.506 of 2008 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. at Nunna Police Station. The 3 deceased was shifted to Department of Forensic Medicine, Government Hospital, Vijayawada and inquest was conducted on the deceasedand a post-mortem report was issued. As the death of the deceased was in the course of employment and as the vehicle was registered with O.P.No.2 vide insurance policy No.150703/31/08/0100001929, which was in force from 29.08.2008 to 28.08.2009, an application for compensation was filed claiming for Rs.3,00,000/- by the claimants i.e., wife and son of the deceased. In the application, it was pleaded that the deceased was being paid Rs.5,000/- per month towards salary and Rs.50/- per day as Batta by O.P.No.1. 4. The O.P.No.1 remained ex parte and did not contest the case. 5. The O.P.No.2 filed counter disputing the claim and pleaded that the deceased died due to “Coronary Artery Insufficiency”, as per the medical certificate and same being a natural death, the insurance company cannot be fastened with liability. An additional counter was also filed contending that the death being a natural death and not an incidental death, the insurance company cannot be held liable. However, in the additional counter, it was admitted that the death of the deceased was in the course of employment. 4 6. In the enquiry, the wife of the deceased was examined as A.W.1 and Exs.A.1 to A.6 were marked i.e., attested copy of FIR, attested copy of inquest report, attested copy of post-mortem report, xerox copy of driving license of deceased driver, copy of the insurance policy, copy of the certificate of registration issued by the RTA. 7. On behalf of the insurance company, Sri K.A.Poornachandra Rao, Assistant Manager was examined as R.W.1 and Exs.B.1 and B.2 were marked i.e.,copy of insurance policy and final opinion on post-mortem report. 8. The Commissioner taking into consideration the above said documents opined that the death of the deceased was in the course of employment and therefore, he is entitled for compensation. The wage of the deceased was taken at the rate of Rs.4880.75/- per month, as per the minimum wage payable vide G.O.Ms.No.83, dated 22.11.2006 and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,56,660/-. Hence, the present appeal. 9 . Heard Sri Penumaka Venkata Rao, learned counsel for the Appellant/insurance company and Sri Sai Ram Murthy, learned counsel for the Respondents. 10. Learned counsel for the Appellant contended that there is no proof that the deceased died due to stress and strain and the nature 5 of death being a natural death, no liability can be fastened on the insurance company. 11. Learned counsel for the Respondents contended that the death being in the course of employment, stress and strain which contributed to the death of the deceased could be visualized considering the nature of job of the deceased. 12. Now the issue that fell for consideration is whether the stress and strain of the job lead to the death of the deceased? 13. Having heard the respective contentions, there is no dispute to the fact that the deceased was driving the vehicle regularly and this Court is of the opinion that the nature of the job of the deceased could be visualized as a factor causing stress and strain and the resultant of Coronary Artery Insufficiency, which resulted in the death of the deceased. In the post-mortem report nor in the pleadings, there is no mention that the deceased was addicted to vices which could be said to be accelerating the death of the deceased. In the absence of any contributory cause for the death of deceased who was a healthy male, the stress and strain of the job of driving can be presumed to be the causative factor for the death of the deceased. 14. Coming to the argument that the heart attack cannot be considered to be causative factor to claim compensation under the Act, 6 it is to be noted that the deceased was working as a Bus driver and the incident happened while he was driving the bus and it would be fair to factor the stress and strain of continuous driving would have contributed to the death of the deceased. In a similar fact scenario, this Court in Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Smt. Chukkala Eshwari and Others1 had considered this aspect and after referring to Judgments of this Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Depot Manager, APSRTC, Karimnagar v. Gurrapu Anjamma 2 , Jyothi Ademma v. Plant Engineer3, Nellore & Another and Param Pal Singh v. National Insurance Co. Ltd.4 held that heart attack having been accelerated due to visualizable stress and strain, the compensation should be paid. In this case also, the very distance of driving can be said to be a contributory factor for the death of the deceased. 15. In the light of the above, the view taken by the Commissioner being a plausible view, the same cannot be interfered with as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Fulmati Dhramdev & Anr. v. New India Assurance Co., Ltd., &Anr5. 16. As regards the liability, the insurance policy of the Appellant/O.P.No.2 was in vogue for the period from 29.08.2008 to 28.08.2009 admittedly and as the incident occurred on 05.12.2008, 12024 SCC OnLine AP 897 21999 5 ALT 684 32006 (5) SCC 513 42013 (3) SCC 409 5 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 746 7 the Appellant-Insurance Company i.e., O.P.No.2 cannot be exonerated from its liability. 17. In view of the above, this Court has not found any merit in the appeal. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 18. Since the incident occurred on 05.12.2008, which is about 15 years back and considering the uncertain addresses of claimants, the State Legal Services Authority shall coordinate with the concerned Departments and inform the claimants about the outcome of the appeal and further ensure that the compensation is paid to the claimants directly into their Aadhar linked bank account. 19. The Registry is directed to mark a copy of this order to the State Legal Services Authority. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 20.02.2025 MDP