c^- ^ /-'' i £^.J K* P i^ STi §Bi?:.'3i" SiSiUI^ Ggij !N THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL (C)DO. 126S 12009 (DB) APPELLANT ^'Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office of Main Company Limited, Branch Office of i2-k.l%?"'i-,».^'^ ^oac'' Kosabadi, Korba, Tahsil and k.i^'~ nfefrinf - Knrha CChhaftisnarM »jft-^'^ s»" yte^- ^ ' -VERSUS. RESPONDENTS , 1\ ^o. 1 to 3 Claimants) '•• ^ 'f\ 3.. QWNER ^ Disfrict - Korba (Chhattisgarh) Shyamlal Shrivas, aged about 62 years, S/o Late Aasharam Shrivas, Caste - Nai Smt. Neera Bai, aged about50 years, W/o Shyamlal Shrivas^Caste - Nai, Minor Ku. Radhika, aged about 16 years, S/o Shyam Lal Shrivas, Caste - Nai, Natural Guardian Mother and father (respondent/claimant no. 1 and 2) Respondent no. 1 to 3 are resident of Roomgada, P.S. Batco, Tahsil and District Korba (Chhattisgarh) Chhattan Ram Yadav, S/o Anant Say, Resident of Kohadiya, Tahsil and District - Korba (Chhattisgarh) APPEAL UNDER SECTION 30 OF W.C.ACT 1923 1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1368 of2009 APPELLANT Insyrer RESPONDENTS (No. 1 to 3Claimants) Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited. Versus Shyamlal Shrivas S Others MiSC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 30 OF THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT, 1923 DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice I.M. Quddusi & Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Agarwal. Present : Shri Raj Awasthy, Advocate for the appeilant. Shri Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate for respondent No.1to3. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 29th day of September, 2010) Per: I.M. Quddusi, J. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellanVinsurance company against the award dated 20.03.2009, passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Labour Court, Korba, in case No. 23/WC Act/ 2008-F, awarding Rs. 3, 01,728/- as compensation in favour of respondents against the appellant/insurance company. The Commissioner also directed the insurance company to deposit the amount within a period of one month faiiing which the amount shall carry interest @ 10 percent per annum from the date of award. "?- - 2. Brief facts of the case according to the appellant are that, on 01.03.2007, Hemlal (since deceased) son of respondent No. 1 & 2, while driving the Tractor bearing registration No. CG-12-F- 0252 and Trolley bearing registration No. CG-12-F-0253, the said Tractor tumed turtle, as a result of whfeh Hemlal succumbed to the injuries sustained in the said accident. 3. As against claim of Rs. 34,80,000/- preferred by the respondents against the appellant for the death of their son in the said accident, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Labour Court, Korba, awarded total amount of Rs. 3,01,728/- as compensation. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has raised a question regarding age of the deceased, though this cannot be a substantial question of law, but, for the convenience, we have perused the records of lower court and found that there is a certificate of the Head Master of Primary School Rumgara, Distt. Korba, according to which the date of birth of the deceased is 05.07.1988 (Ex. P/8). AW-1 (Shyamlal) has stated the age of the deceased as 20 years at the time of accident. 5. The approximate age mentioned in the Postmortem report cannot be said to be well authentic in view of the fact that the age of the deceased was not determined in the Postmortem repbrt by following the procedure. In view of this, the schobl certificate which is an authentic document cannot be disbelieved. Further, the statement of AW-1, supporting the age is also available and in the cross-examination there is no sjuggestion regarding the age of the deceased, therefore, it cannot be said that the Commissioner for Workmen's 3 ;. ..iv% Compensation has committed any illegality in determining the age of the deceased as 20 years at the time of accident. 6. The calculation of the compensation has been made accordlng to the Schedule-IV of the Workmen's Compensation Act, and therefore, no substantiat question of law is involved in this appeal. Regarding other issue of non availability of effective ahd vsilid driving license on record is concerned, it is well settled that if the insurance company wanted to raise a plea that the deceased was not having valid and effective driving license atthe time of accident, burden of prove was on the shoulder of the insurance company which has not been done. Therefore, in the absence of the same, it cannot be said that the deceased was not having valid and effective driving license at the time of accident. 7. tn view of above, this appeal fails. The same deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. No order asto costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddussi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge Sahu f