IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2670 of 1998 (O&M) Date of decision:08.10.2010 Sunita and others ....Appellants versus Rajinder and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Davinder Sangwan, Advocate, for Mr. R.S.Kundu, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Vinod Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.2. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. The claimants' action which was dismissed is the subject of appeal. The claimants were the representatives of the deceased Roshan Lal, who was driving the insured's vehicle. The vehicle had been hit by yet another vehicle and the said other vehicle sped from the place. The FIR had been lodged referring to the accident and the death of the driver. The police investigation did not yield to any clue about the details of the other vehicle. The petition was still filed by the representatives under the MV Act against the owner of the very vehicle which the deceased was driving. The insurer had also been made a party. The Tribunal found that if there was negligence of yet another vehicle and there was no negligence of the deceased himself, with no proof of the details of the FAO No.2670 of 1998 (O&M) - 2 - other vehicle involved in the accident, it proceeded to determine the compensation under the MV Act but still gave no relief since the person against whom the compensation ought to have claimed in case of negligence of some other vehicle was not before the Tribunal. 2. The Tribunal, under such a circumstance, must have referred the party to an appropriate proceeding under the WC Act, since the death was the result of the driver driving a motor vehicle and suffering fatal injuries in the course of employment. The death in the accident was not denied. The status of the driver under the insured as workman was not contested by the owner of the vehicle. The death while the driver was still driving the insured's vehicle must be taken as the result of a death in the course of employment. This Court being a Court of appeal under Section 30 of the WC Act, I would apply the scale of compensation that is prescribed under the WC Act. The deceased was 26 years old and the appropriate factor as prescribed under Schedule-IV to the WC Act is 215.28. The driver's salary was said to be Rs.1,500/- and if I take 50% of the same and multiply it by the factor, the amount of compensation that would become payable would come to Rs.1,61,460/-. This amount shall also bear interest at 12% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. 3. The award of the Tribunal is set aside and the appeal is allowed by applying the provisions of WC Act. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 08.10.2010 sanjeev