^ c^ 4.<1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. (C) N0. ^^ ivisi 'sei /2010 (D.B.l APPELLANTS/ APPLICANTS /(Before the commissioner 1 workman compensationDurg) ,v •? : 1. Santoshi Nirmalkar, aged about 22 years, Wd/o Late Suresh Nirmalkar. .4 V 1 ,2./ Madan Gopal Nirmalkar, .y"^:^fi' aged about 10 months, S/o ..i^""^ •^ui.!;.:..--fuv Late Suresh Nirmalkar, i.^-"" Minor guardian through natural mother Smt. RESPONDENTS/ NON-APPLICANTS Before theCoramissioner Workman compensation Durg) Santoshi Nirmalkar, All residents of Village Hasda, Post Arkar, Tahsil Gurur, out post Kanwar, P.S. Gurur, Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS : 1,. Roop Singh Sahu, S/o Mahesh Ram Sahu, aged about 26 years, Driver of Vehicle No. C.G.-04, Z.C./0517, R/o Village Dadhari, Post Gurur, Police Station Sc, Tahsil Gurur, Distt. Durg (C.G.) (L. '^-^E-AA,^. v-~& 6 Bt® w- WS^HSSKS HO. S.f" fi,—u<A.^-fc"^'rts/'e'r' ^y^ c—^"v^^ ^.QeSL 2<=.(?°t2-°i-o f-.\^- Sdl"-i_ 1f^|to|%»K? ^^\^ »sa^i^t (e.'e.) ^v t^-v ^ v^ ^ ^ ^- 4. deceased late Suresh Nirmalkar, R/o Ambedkar Chowk Jodhapur ward Dhamtari, TahsU 8s Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Registered & Head Office, Ashif Ali Road, New Delhi, Through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Opposite Adarsh Bal Mandir, Main Road Dhamtari, TahsU & Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) 85 Zonal Manager, Zonal Office, Malviya Nagar, Durg (C.G.) Punit Ram Nirmalkar, R/o ViUage Soram, Post Bhatgaon, Police Station Arjuni, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) fafher of the deceased namely Suresh Nirmalkar . c' P^X/fA^ Q-5. Smt. Rajbai Nirmalkar, W/o F'unit Ram Nirmalkar, R/o ViUage Soram, Post Bhatgaon, P.S. Arjiini, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) (mother of the deceased Suresh Nirmalkar) MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL U/S 30 OF THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT 1923 ^-•' Fixed court fees of Rs. 15/- ~^~_ Claim amountjofRs^4,31,981/- Award aniount of Rs. NU. Appeal value Rs. 4.31.981/- HI6H COURT OFCHHATriS6ARH AT BILASPUR MVIS!ON_BENCH: HON'BLE AAR. I.M.QU&DUSI & HON'BLE MR.6ULAM MINHAJUDDIN. JJ. Appeilants Respondents Ut.A.td No.214/2010 SantoAi Nirmalkar & another Vs ftoop Singh Sahu & others AAr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate for the appellonts. Mr. K. Das, Advocate for the req)ondent No.l & 2. Xr. Ruj Awasthi, Advocate for resp6nd®itNo.3. Mr. P.K. Patel, Advocate for the respondents No.4 & S OROER (Oral) (22!!d Juiy. 2011) I.M. Quddusi. J; 1. Heard. 2. The (ippeltants-claimants hnve filed -rtiis appeal against the order dated 22.01.2009 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Labour Court, t)urg (C6) (for brevity "the Coinmissioner') in Case No.l37/WC Act Fatal/2007 dismissing Theclaim application of the claimants. 3. Facts of the case, in nutshel), are that the claimants bemg the tegal heirs of deceased Suresh Nirmalkar, who died under the employment of the respondent No.2 herein, had filed a ctaim application before the Commissioner seeking compensation along with interest and penalt/ from the respondents. 4. The Coinmissioner dismissed the claim application /bte/'a//aholding that the death of deceased was not caused during the course of employment. 5. We have heard learned counsel for 1+ie parties and perused the impugned award as also records of the tribunal below. 6. On careful examination of record, we found thut itie Commissioner has iost sight of The fact that there was prompt first information report and in the report itsetf it was mentioned that when the deceased was entering into the truck from conductor side, the drjver of said truck, all of suddar;^ ^;S;-.^WEa«^^3R'-' 2 proceeded in a high qieecl without taking care of the conductor deceased. Furtiier, in -the written statement filed on behatf of the non-applicont Nos.l & 2 i.e. driver <& employer-owner, it has been admitted that the deoea^sd was engaged under the emptoyment of non-applicant No.2. In lliese circumstonces, we are of the opinion that it cannot be said that death was not caused during the course of emptoyment for the reason that due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of vehicte-tn-question 1+ie accident had taken ptace during the course of employment of th®deceosed resuWng in his death. Thus, we feel that the matter be remitt-ed back to 1he Commissioner for ctecision afresh. 7. In the result, we allow the instant appeat in part, set aside the order dated 22.1.2009 ond remit the matt-er back to the Commissioner for deciswn afresh. The Commissioner shall provide opportunity to the parties to adduce further evidence, if any, amend the. pleadings, file or verify documents atready fited. The part-ies are directed to appear before the Commissioner on 24th Auaust. 2011 either in person or through thejr counsel. The Registry is directed to tr-onsmit the record of the Commissioner without further delay. -8^_Certifiedja»pYasPer fules. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge