IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE MONDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2011 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 MFA.No. 99 of 2008 --------------------------- WCC.154/1996 of THE COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION, (DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER),THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND OPPOSITE PARTY: -------------------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NENMARA NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE,SHARANYA HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): APPLICANTS AND 4TH OPPOSITE PARTY: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. DAKSHAYANI, W/O.ARUMUGHAN, HOUSE NO.495/6, KARUVAPPANKALAM, PERUVAMBA P.O., PALAKKAD. 2. RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O.ARUMUGHAN, ---DO-----. 3. OMANA, D/O.ARUMUGHAN, --------DO-------. 4. GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O.LATE ARUMUGHAN, --DO----. (IST OPPOSITE PARTY DIED. OPPOSITE PARTIES 3, 5 & 6 ARE ALREADY IN THE PARTY ARRAY AS THE APPLICANTS) R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.A.R.GANGADAS THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & A. M. SHAFFIQUE, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.(WCC) No.99 of 2008-C ----------------------------------------- Dated, this the 12th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Appellant is the second opposite party in a proceedings under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. This is a case where the applicants approached the Commissioner on the following brief allegations. The applicants are the legal heirs of the deceased workman. When the deceased was driving a tractor it capsized and fell to a paddy field. He was 21 years of age and he was employed by the first opposite party. The first opposite party is admittedly the father of the deceased. Appellant filed objections. After raising issues, the Commissioner found that the deceased was employed as a driver and awarded an amount of Rs.2,19,950/- as compensation with interest at 12% per annum. 2. We heard Sri.Mathews Jacob, learned senior counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the applicants. Originally, the appellants pointed out that the matter was pending before the Commissioner the first opposite party passed away. MFA 99/2008 -2- Thereupon, the applicants along with another came to be impleaded as additional opposite parties. He would then pose a question on the basis of factual development as how the insurance company could be made liable to pay the applicants who are also the respondents when they become the legal heirs of the first opposite party? That apart, it is contended that this is a case where the deceased did not have a licence. A separate substantial question of law was also raised on the basis of amendment of memorandum of appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that even if the order is allowed to stand necessarily there is no licence. The result would be that this Court would have to confer right to recover the amount from the applicants. We gave time to the learned counsel for the applicants to ascertain whether there is licence. Learned counsel for the applicants would tell us that he was not in a position to contend that the deceased had valid licence at the time of accident. If that is so, in the facts of this case we would think that the appellant is justified in impugning the award as it will result in paying with one hand and recovering with the other. Accordingly, on the ground that the deceased did not have licence and it MFA 99/2008 -3- amounted to violation of the policy conditions we find that the order is to be overturned. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order. The amount deposited by the appellant will be refunded to the appellant. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (A. M. SHAFFIQUE) JUDGE. MS