1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.08.2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.378 of 2011 and MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.1 of 2011 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Karaikudi. .. Appellant/2nd Respondent Vs. 1.Dhivya Prabha .. 1st Respondent/Petitioner 2.Kannan .. 2nd Respondent/1st Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, against the order dated 12.11.2010 passed in W.C.No.259 of 2007 by the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli. For Appellants .. Mr.K.Bhaskaran For Respondent .. Mr.G.R.Swaminathan No.1 For Respondent .. No appearance No.2 JUDGMENT The award dated 12.11.2010 passed in W.C.No.259 of 2007 by the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli is being challenged in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 2. The first respondent herein as petitioner has filed W.C.No.259 of 2007 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli praying to pass an award of Rs.5,00,000/- wherein the present appellant has been shown as second respondent. 3. The Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli after considering the available evidence on record has awarded a compensation of Rs.4,33,060/-. Against the liability, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred at the instance of the second respondent as appellant. 4. On the side of the appellant/second respondent, two vital points have been raised. The first and foremost point is that the deceased is the son-in-law of the first respondent, owner of the vehicle and he never served as an employee of the first respondent and therefore the present claim is not legally maintainable. The second point is that the deceased has not possessed of valid and effective driving license so as to drive the vehicle, which belongs to the first respondent. The Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli without considering Ex.P.3 and also without considering the second stand taken on the side of the appellant/second respondent has erroneously passed the award in question and therefore the award passed by the Commissioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli is liable to be set aside. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/petitioner has contended that for the purpose of proving the contention that the deceased has not possessed of valid and effective driving license at the time of accident, on the side of the appellant/second respondent concerned Motor Vehicle Inspector has not been examined and under the said circumstances, the award passed by the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli is perfectly correct and the same need not be interfered with. 6. As stated earlier, on the side of the appellant/second respondent, two vital points have been raised. With regard to first point, the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli has given a finding to the effect that the deceased has passed away during the course of employment of the first respondent on the basis of the evidence given by the witness, who has been examined on the side of the second respondent. Therefore the first point raised on the side of the appellant/second respondent does not assume much importance. 7. The second point is that the deceased has not possessed of valid and effective driving license at the time of accident. Ex.A.3 is nothing, but a driving license authorized to drive Light Motor Vehicles. The vehicle, which has been driven by the deceased is a tourist vehicle. 8. The Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli has negatived the second point urged on the side of the appellant/second respondent simply on the ground that on the side of the appellant/second respondent concerned Motor Vehicle Inspector has not been examined. The reason given by the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli for rejecting the second point urged on the side of the appellant/second respondent is not correct and it is for the petitioner to prove that at the time of accident the deceased has possessed of valid and effective driving license. Since the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli has rejected the second contention urged on the side of the appellant/second respondent on the basis of the reason given supra, it is needless to say that the entire award passed by the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli is liable to be set aside and the matter is liable to be remitted to the file of the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli. 9. In fine, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed without costs and the order passed in W.C.No.259 of 2007 by the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli is set aside and W.C.No.259 of 2007 is remitted to the file of the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli. The first respondent/petitioner is directed to give necessary evidence with regard to second point raised on the side of the appellant/second respondent. The appellant/second respondent is also at liberty to adduce additional evidence. The Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli is directed to dispose of W.C.No.259 of 2007 before the end of October, 2011. The https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 Registry is directed send records forthwith. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (crl.side) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S) To The Commissioner for Workmens Compensation, (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli. smn C.M.A(MD)No.378 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 05.08.2011 TR : 25.08.2011: 3P/2C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/