Sumer Singh (the deceased) whose legal representatives are before this Court, was employed as a driver with the respondent no.2 for driving truck bearing no. The order passed by the Commissioner awarding compensation was challenged by the Insurance Company before the High Court.
Vide impugned order, the High Court accepted the appeal Respondent No.2 in the present appeal is Kuldeep Bhatia, owner of the vehicle.
Relying upon the judgment of Civil Appeal No 5416 of 2012 this Court in Param Pal Singh Through Father v. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that it is not in dispute that the deceased was not driving the vehicle at the time of his death. The Insurance Policy was effective from 30.06.2003 to 29.06.2004.
While driving the vehicle from Delhi to Baroda, the health of the deceased deteriorated on 15.09.2003 at about 12:30 a.m.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/retirement-age-of-pti-sports-officer-in-university/
It was pleaded in the application filed by the appellants before the Commissioner that the deceased was drawing Civil Appeal No 5416 of 2012 a monthly salary of 3,091/-(Rupees three thousand and ninety one) plus 50/-(Rupees fifty) per day as allowance.
In case, the deceased employee was already suffering from any existing disease and died on account of that, it cannot be said to be a case of death during the course of employment. This Court accepted the appeal filed by the dependents of the deceased and found that even if the death had not occurred on account of any accident but the driver was consistently driving the vehicle, there is every reason to assume that long spells of driving was a material contributory factor, if not the sole cause that accelerated his Civil Appeal No 5416 of 2012 unexpected death at a young age.
The deceased being a professional heavy vehicle driver when undertakes the job of such driving as his regular avocation it can be safely held that such constant driving of heavy vehicle, being dependent solely upon his physical and mental resources and endurance, there was every reason to assume that the vocation of driving was a material contributory factor if not the sole cause that accelerated his unexpected death to occur which in all fairness should be held to be an Civil Appeal Such an “untoward mishap” can therefore be reasonably described as an “accident” as having been caused solely attributable to the nature of employment indulged in with his employer which was in the course of such employer’s trade or business. In our view, the judgments relied upon by him do not support his case.
Case Title: SMT. DARIYAO KANWAR Vs. M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. (2023INSC756)
Case Number: C.A. No.-005416-005416 / 2012
