^i BEFORE THE HON'BLEHIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH M.A.fC) N0. BILASPUR tfgo /2007 APPELLANT 0EFENDANTN0.1 le Oriental Insurance Company Limited, through the Divisional Manager, Division Office (Old address in from of High Court) at present in front of Rajeev plaza, Bus Stand, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS RESPONDENTNO.l 1. ^ClAIMANT N0.1 ~ fi- RESPONDENT N0.2 2. ) CLAIMANT N0.2 /^ RESPONDENT N0.2 3. DEFENDANTNO.l' Smt. Bindu Kurmi, aged about 20 years, widow of Late Nandu @ Nand Kumar. Ku. Sanjana Kurmi, aged about 2 years (Minor) D/o. Late Nandu @ Nand Kumar, through - Natural Guardian Smt. Bindu Kurmi Both are resident of village Gataura, P.S. Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) Vidyanand Rathore, aged about 42 years, son of Shri Ghutaru Rathore, resident of village Gatoura, P.S. Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) (OWNERt x^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A.fONo. 480 of 2007 APPELLANT DEFEN^ANTNOJ RESPONDENTS The Orientat Insurance Company Limited. Versus Smt. Bindu Kurmi and others. + APPEAL UNDER SECTSON 30 OF THE WORKMEN'S GQMPENSATSON ACT. 1823 Divjsion Bench: Hon'ble Shri l.iVI. Quddusi 8s Hon'bie Shri N.K. Aaarwal. JJ. Shri Prashant Jayaswai, Senior Advocate with Shri Ajay K4ishra, counsel for the appeilant. Shri Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, counsei for rsspondents No. 1 & 2. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 29tt day of September, 2010} This appeai has been filed against the award dated 31-01-2007 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Act (Labour Court), Bilaspur (for short 'the Commissioner') in Case No. 244/W.C.A./2003 (F), awarding compensation to the claimante to the tune of Rs.3,65,860/- which was made payable by the appellant/'nsurance Company and also imposed penalty upon the non- applicant No.1 to the tune of Rs.10,000/-, though we are not concemed with the penalty in this appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case according to appeilant are that deceased Nand Kumar @ Nandu was working under the employment of respondent No.SA/idyanand Rathore and the respondent No.3 is the owner of the Tractor bearing registration No. C.G. 10-ZG/0437 and Trolley bearing registration No.C.G. 10-ZG/0438 and the appellant is the insurer ofthe Tractor-trolley. The deceased while going to Behla Mandi by driving the said vehicle (Tractor-Trolley) for selling the paddy, in front of S.E.C.L. gate, thesaid tractor turned turtle due to which Nand Kumar died in the said accident. '<i». •••:-> ^vs.^&. » ^ 3. The ctaimants, unfortunate widow and minor daughter of the deceased, preferred a petition before the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation for award of compensation from the non-applicants, as they did not get compensation from the non- applicant No.3/responden{ No.3 herein, for the death of the deceased in the said accident. 4. The Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, on a close scrutiny of the evidence, material placed on record and submissions made by fhe parties, by the impugned award, awarded a compensation of Rs.3,65,860/- to the claimants. 5. We have perused the records of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. 6. The Cover note of the appellanfinsurance Company ( Ex. D-2) shows that Type of insurance is 'Kisan Package' and the amount of premium has been mentioned as Rs. 2,0971- and the period of insurance was from 23-12-2002 to 22-12-2003. The pay stip was issued by the Bank of tndia, Bilaspur Branch and the Senior Manager of that Branch (NAW-2) namely Shri K.K. lyer, came into witness box as one of the witnesses of the Insurance Company and made the relevant statement that ° ^ STO TOPIN 'TC "^-Rspf g;r vK tfNr giT;ft sro CTI^ te 4 yreFT ^g ^sr teir ufrar tfi' OTI^ te §ra(?rtNtT ;?w ^r dwlfed rftf''RTT ^s ^! groFi f^RrT uffBT i It is also stated in para 8 of his statement that "?i?mr^t t Q; ^ §TO ^ddlti ^ iiti^PT '?ll^T <5iri? 2097.00 R'l 23.122002 W(T 1^l? "1?^ ^ wsfK T? ^r sresf ^1/2 3iT <i>c|<i4ld ^Nr ^ipft 5Ti;T ysj9l telT ;TOT 8111 " 7. The Insurance Company has further produced witness No.2, i.e. Aaministrative Offlcer namely Shri Anil Sao. In para 6 of his statement he has stated that: "iresf ^t/a g»r <hM'iicd s^ *t<-fl ^ Rcbi'ti aR)*iO <ft tiw Bic)41 ^ utr& OBIT aff —- " 8. In paragraph 10 & 11, he has inter-alia stated that "v^S ^i/2 cpr *ct^4i<! 8?> ^r urr?F I^OTT 'TOT air, °pfif^> ai?'T ^iq? eft i uf. 11. "q? 9>?^I vSs t fe te g?r??T O^ft 'nwr g;r ^•11^1 ~sn vfi^ gra- ^F^f ^> BlRfiT ft chd'i-lld OtT^ fegT unrfr tt :RI?T Wf f fS? ijir^T yrpf ^ >d4>iit) tg? ^ £Rr^?r^ Rm aiTi" 9. All the above statements show that it was the carelessness of the Insurance Company that pay stip fssued by the Bank was not en-cashed for which the insured cannot be a sufferer. 10. !n view of the above, it cannot be said that the vehicle was not insured. 11. No other points have been raised by the learned counsel for the appetlant. 12. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant/lnsurance Company has no substance. It is liable to be and is hereby dismissed- No order as to costs. Kvr SA'- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge