IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.M.A.No.2175 OF 2001 Date:27.11.2009. Between:- The New India Assurance Company Limited, rep.by its Divisional Manager, Nizamabad. ..Appellant/Respondent No.1 And Zaheer and another .. Respondents/Applicant/Respondent No.2 JUDGMENT:- This appeal is directed against the order dated 30.09.1997 passed in W.C.No.206 of 1996 NF on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation-cum-Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad wherein the claim of respondent No.1 herein is allowed awarding compensation of Rs.1,20,000/- for the injuries sustained by him during the course of his employment. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondents though served with notices. Perused the records. Respondent No.1 herein filed the claim application seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 22.01.1996. According to him, he was a driver of the lorry bearing No.ADT 6951 belonging to respondent No.2 herein and that on that day, while he was driving the lorry from Wardha towards Hyderabad, he could not control the lorry due to which, the lorry over turned and he sustained fracture injuries on both the legs, besides other injuries. He further pleaded that he was admitted in Wardha hospital and thereafter, shifted to Nirmal hospital. He claims that he was getting a salary of Rs.2,200/- per month and batta of Rs.50/- per day and was aged 25 years at the time of accident. The appellant-insurer filed a counter opposing the claim and denying their liability to pay the compensation. The owner of the vehicle-respondent No.2 did not contest the matter. During the enquiry, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-6 were marked. No oral evidence was adduced by the appellant/insurer but Exs.B-1 and B-2 were marked. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the learned Commissioner held that the applicant sustained employment injuries in the accident during the course of his employment and awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,20,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the insurer filed the present appeal. The learned counsel for appellant-insurer would mainly contend that there was no accident at all and the applicant has not adduced any evidence to show that he suffered injuries on account of any such accident during the course of employment. The applicant would be entitled to claim compensation under the provisions of Workmen’s Compensation Act only when he is able to establish that he sustained employment injuries in the accident, which occurred during the course of his employment. Even assuming that the applicant was a driver employed by respondent No.2 herein on the lorry bearing No.ADT 6951, he has to establish that he sustained the injuries in the accident that occurred while he was driving the lorry from Wardha to Hyderabad during the course of his employment. The applicant has not placed any evidence to show that any such accident has taken place on 22.01.1996 in the outskirts of Wardha, as alleged by him. He has not chosen to file even a copy of the F.I.R. There is nothing on record to show that the applicant has given any complaint to the police regarding the accident. There is absolutely no investigation done by the police into the alleged accident to ascertain the cause of the accident and who is responsible for the same. No doubt, the applicant has examined P.W.2-Medical Officer, who issued the disability certificate – Ex.A-4. Even assuming that the applicant has sustained fracture injuries on his legs as alleged by him, still, there is no connecting evidence to show that the said injuries were sustained because of the accident. Thus, the applicant has failed to establish that there was, in fact, an accident and during the course of such accident, he sustained the said injuries. In other words, the applicant has miserably failed to establish that he sustained employment injuries in terms of the Workmen’s Compensation Act to enable him to claim compensation under the provisions of the said Act. The learned Commissioner has erred in awarding compensation without there being any evidence to show that the applicant sustained an employment injury. Under those circumstances, it is held that the impugned Award passed by the learned Commissioner is unsustainable and the same is accordingly set aside. In the result, the appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____​______________ G. V. SEETHAPATHY, J 27th November, 2009 AMD