u S^r^ ^onr-^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURt OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc. Appeal{C} N0. HM4 /2011 APPELLANT Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Through Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Pandri, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.) (INSURER) VERSUS RESPOWDENTS l\ 2); 3)? ^' ^ ^, Malti Bai W/o Shivram Tarak, aged about 45 years, » Dev Singh S/o Shivram Tarak, aged about 21 years, Uttara Bai D/o Shivram Tarak, aged about 15 years, minor represented through na^ural guardian mother resporident?tlo.l Smt. Malti Bai, All are resident of Village Seoni, Post Seoni, Thana Mana, Tahsil 85 District Raipur (C.G.) (Claimants) Baliram Dheevar, S/o Devnarayan Dheevar, R/o Boriyakhurd, Thana Tikrapara,Tahsil & District Raipur (C.G.) (Ownerl MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDEItSECTION 30 OF THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT 1923 ^ :.<^\\ ^c^ 4). HIGH COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QUDDUSI St HON'BLE MR.6ULAM MINHAJUDDIN^J'J Appellant Respondents M.A. M No.449/2011 Bajaj Allianz Generai Insuronce Co, Ltd. Vs Malti Bai <& 3 others Present: Mr. S.S. ftajput, Advocote for the appeilant. Mr. AAaiay Kumar Bhaduri, Advocate for the respondents No.l &. 2. ORDER COral) ^ (1st December, 2011) I.M. Quddusi. J; 1. Heard. 2. The appellant-Insurance Company has filed this appeal against the order dated 15.12.2010 passed by the learned Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act cum Labour Court, ftaipur (for short 'the Commissioner') in Claim Case No.l/B/173/2008/W.C.Act Fatal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the cteimants, who are widow and chitdren of deceased Shivram Tarak, have filed a claim application under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act, 1923') W' ^eking compensation to the tune of Rs.4,45,420/- along with penalty for the death of ^aid Shivram Tarak, who died under the employment of respondent No.4 herein in an accident which took place on 14.5,2008. 4* Learned Commissioner vide impugned order partly albwed the claim application, awarded compensation and fastened liability on the appellant herein to pay the amount of compensation to the clGimants. f 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment as also records of the Commissioner. 6. In the present case a certificate has been issued by the Kegional Trar^poct Office concerned to the effect that driver of the vehicle-in- question was having driving licence to drive.motorcycle wi-rii aear + light motor vehicles + heavy goods vehicle, which was valid from 3.7.1998 to ^ ^ 24.6.2007 and thereafter from 18.7.2008 to 17.7.2011. However, from the certificate it is not clear that the driving licence was valid on the date of accident or not as it is an admitt-ed fact that the accident took piace on 14.5.2008. In this situation, we feel that the matter requires reconsideration at the end of the Commissioner. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Commissioner for taking decision afresh in light of the observation made in this order. It is atso made ciear that other points would also remain open if they are raised by any of the :;, partjes, Needless to mention that 1+ie Commissioner shall provide opportunity to the parties to adduce further evidence, if any, and amend the pleadings or to file or verify the documents already filed. The amount of compensation already deposited by the appellant-Insurance Company and yet not disbursed to 1+ie claimants, shall be kept in a fixed deposit scheme of a nationalized bank and shall -be sujyject to decision afresh in the matter. 8. The parties are directed to appear before the Commissioner concerned on 18.01.2012. The Registry is directed to transmit record of the Commissioner withput any further delay. No order as to costs. RoshdnA Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge