48 c 1 1 r FAnO0Noe31630f 2011 tO8M IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNOABAND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FeAeOaNoa3163 of 2011 lO8MI Date of Decision2 April 8212 2011 1 RoyalSundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited 4ppellant Versus 6 SmtePoonam and others Respondents CORAMl HONBLE MR1USTICE MOHINDER PAL 1 WhetherReportersof Iocal papers may be allowed to see the judgment7 2 To be referred to the Reportersor not 3 Whetherthe judgmentshould be reportedin the Digest7 9 Present1 Mr Ashwani Talwar Advocate for the appellant MOHINDER PAL 1 Civil Misc Noe10472mCII of 2011 This filed for condoningthe deiay of 58 daysin filing the appeal is supportedby an affidavit For the reasons stated in the the same is allowed and delay of 58 daysinfiling the appealiscondoned Batra Amit 2013.04.17 00: 50 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 49 2 b FnAnOeNos3163 of 2011 108M1 FAOe Noe3163 of 2011 lOSMle RoyalSundaram Ailiance Insurance CompanyLimited 0pellant hereinafter referred to as the Insurance Company2 has filed this appeal challengingthe orderl award dated 18102010 passed by the Commissioner under the Workmens CompensationAct Sonepat hereinafter referred to as the Commissionerowhereby he granted compensation to the extent of RsA305601 along with simple m interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing 0 of the claim petition Iee 13011 2009 till its realization to the claimantse 0 respondentsNos1 to 4 on account of the death of DaljitSingh which had taken place on 2592009 due to heart attack while he was I driving the truck of respondent No5 from Ambala 4aryana9to 4t Z Chennai Tamilnadul RespondentNo l IS widow respondentNOe2 IS tm minor son and respondentsNos3 and 4 are parentsof DaIjitSingh L et The stand taken by the Insurance Company before the I Commissioner inter alia was that DaljltSingh leceasedl was Z Gr never employed by respondentNo 5 as a Driver on Truck NoHR 00 4134 and that the claim petition had been fiied by respondentsNos c9 1 to 4 in collusion with respondentNo 5 Z The Commissioner after appraisingthe entire evidence Ied Oa by the parties held that there existed relationshipof master and servant between No5 and DaljitSingh leceasec Daljit Singh at the time of his death was aged about 26 years Taklng the monthlysalaryof DaljitSingh leceaseco as Rs40001 per month the Commissioner awarded the compensationto respondentsNos l to 4 as mentioned above The truck on which the deceased had been employedby respondentNoa5 was insuredwith the Insurance Company as per policyExhibit P Batra Amit 2013.04.17 00: 50 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SO 3 0 FeAaOIloe3163 of 2011 lOSMle Learned counsel for the Insurance Company during the course of arguments by placing reliance on the authorityreportedas Shakuntala Chandrakant Shreshti Vse Prabhakar Maruti Garvali C2007111 Supreme Court Cases 668 argued that unless evidence IS brought on record to establish that death by way of cardiac arrest was because of stress and strain of work the Commissioner would have no jurisdictionto grant damages In Shakuntala Chandrakant Shreshtis 1 case supral the workman was working as a Cleaner and had suddenly developed chest pain Ieadingto his death due to rupture 0 0 aortic aneurysm In this case the deceased was working as a Driver on the truck Ioaded with goods a nd wason a Iongjourney from Ambala to Chennai The stress and strain upon the deceased who was a z young man of about 26 years at the time of his death can be inferred from the nature of his duties as a Truck Driver There 0 was certainlystress and strain upon the deceased due to nature of his I duties and workload which caused severe heart pain resulting in heart attack and his death e Obviously there is a Iot of difference between 4r co the duties performed by the Driver and the ConductorlCleaner So 4 Il W the findingsof the Honble SupremeCourt in Shakuntala Chandrakant Z Shreshtis case supra wili be of no help to the Insurance Company Om The amount of as awarded by the Commissioner mentioned above can in no way be said to be on the higher side keepingIn vIew the age of the deceased and hisearning capacitYe Resultantlyr so far as merits of the case are concerned this appeal deserves to be dismissed AccordinglY it is hereby dismisseda However on the amount of awarded bythe Commissioner i RsA305601e respondentsNose l to Batra Amit 2013.04.17 00: 50 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 51 4 6 t FAOn No3163 of 2011 OSMla 4 will be entitled to simpleinterest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum instead of interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum as awarded by the Commissioner from the date of filing of the claim petition ie 13112009 till its realization e1 Datedl April r9A 2011 MOHINDER PAL 1 JUDGE m C 0 0 9 I Z I 1 l 11 14 3 Z t 0m Batra Amit 2013.04.17 00: 50 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document