1 APHC010458502016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 926/2016 Between: 1. G.SAVITHRI, W/O.LATE NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O.PAPPULA MILL STREET, GOLLAPUDI CENTRE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. G.NAGACHANDRA PEDDI LAKSHMI, D/O.LATE NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O.PAPPULA MILL STREET, GOLLAPUDI CENTRE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. G.VENKATA GANI SIVA KUMAR, S/O.LATE NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/O.PAPPULA MILL STREET, GOLLAPUDI CENTRE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. G.UDAYA BHASKARA RAO, S/O.LATE NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O.PAPPULA MILL STREET, GOLLAPUDI CENTRE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1. A.RADHA KRISHNA MURTHY, TRANSPORT CONTRACTOR, M/S.SREE NARAYANA SWAMY TRANSPORT, OWNER OF LORRY NO.AP 16 U 5193, R/O.D.NO.54-19-56/3, LIC COLONY, VIJAYAWADA - 8. 2. THE NATIONAL INSSURANCE CO., LTD., REP., BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, O/O.D.NO.27-33-31, GOVERNORPET, VIJAYAWADA - 2. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. T S RAYALU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. N S BHASKARA RAO 2. . The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 926/2016 J U D G M E N T: 1. The Appellants before this Court are the applicants in W.C.No.87 of 2002. Being aggrieved by the Award passed by the Court of Commissioner for Workman’s Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Vijayawada dated 20.05.2006, present Appeal is preferred. 2. The case of the appellants in brief is that – the deceased was aged about 45 years and was employed as Driver on a monthly salary of Rs.1,875/- on lorry bearing No.AP16 U 5193 owned by opposite party No.1, for which, the opposite party No.2 is the insurer. The deceased died in the lorry. The body of the deceased was lying in the cabin of the said lorry right from 17.15 hours on 09.02.1999 to early morning 7.20 hours on 10.02.1999 till Cleaner found and reported the same to the I.O.C.,. i. The 1st applicant being the wife of the deceased filed W.C.No.87 of 2002 under Section 22 of Workman’s Compensation Act, 1923. The 1st applicant being the wife of deceased examined as A.W.1 and got marked Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.10 documents. ii. The Assistant Commissioner of Labour passed an Award making the Opposite Party No.1 alone liable to pay compensation of Rs.1,58,850/- (Rupees one lakh, fifty eight thousand, eight hundred and fifty), taking into consideration the age of the deceased as 45 years and the wage as Rs.1,875/- per month i.e., 1,875/- x 50 / 100 x 169.44 =1,58,850/-. 3. Aggrieved by the same, present appeal has been preferred by the applicants on the ground that the Commissioner failed to take into consideration the evidence of the Doctor who examined the deceased – Workman and 4 declared that he died due to heart attack and also on the ground that the Commissioner erred in holding that the Trip Sheet etc., are required and failed to see that those will be available with the owner and cannot be submitted by the Legal Representatives of the deceased – Workman. 4. Perused the documents filed by the application along with Award passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour and it can be observed that the 1st applicant who is wife of the deceased got examined herself as A.W.1. During her cross examination by the opposite party No.1 she herself admitted that she has not filed any proof that her husband was driving the lorry bearing Registration No.AP16 U 5193 from Kakinada to Kondapalli at I.O.C., bottling plant on 09.02.1999, that she has not filed trip sheet for carrying gas cylinder from Kakinada to Kondapalli, that no report was given to the police about the said accident, that treatment particulars were not filed, that there are no injuries to the deceased, that there is no accident to the vehicle bearing No. AP16 U 5193 and also that there is no postmortem and no proof of age of the deceased was filed. In spite of the same, the Assistant Commissioner of Labour on considering the fact that the Cleaner of the said lorry who allegedly have seen dead body of the deceased in the cabin on the next day morning was not examined to confirm that the deceased was driving the said vehicle from Kakinada to Kondapalli and also that there is no damage to the vehicle, no injury to the deceased, no F.I.R., lodged, no Postmortem examination conducted nor the dead body was shifted to Government Hospital for check-up, has held that opposite party No.2 is not liable to pay any compensation and made only opposite party No.1 liable to pay compensation of Rs.1,58,850/- which is neither legal nor arbitrary. 5. Though 1st applicant – appellant, who is the wife of the deceased, was examined as A.W.1, she has failed to establish the employee and employer relationship, the question of awarding further compensation and fixing liability on opposite party No.2 does not arise. 5 6. In view of the same, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated:19.01.2026 KS 6 130 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 926/2016 Dated:19.01.2026 KS