This civil miscellaneous appeal is directed against the award dated 07.03.2005 made in W.C.No.13 of 2003 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, (Deputy Commissioner of Labour-I, Chennai - 6.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company would mainly contend that the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation/Deputy Commissioner of Labour-I, Chennai, erred in holding that the deceased was a driver and sustained employment injuries. It is further contended that the Commissioner has failed to note that the name of the driver was not mentioned in the F.I.R. The learned counsel also contended that the Commissioner has failed to note that one Babu alias Gnanasekaran alone had sustained employment injuries and died and the name of the deceased Larsen alias Vijayakumar was not mentioned in any capacity of workmen. Further, the Commissioner has failed to note that no acceptable evidence has been placed to prove that the deceased was employed by Pentecostal Mission nor he was paid a salary of Rs.4,000/- per month and erred in awarding a huge and disproportionate award without evidence. Hence, the award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation/Deputy Commissioner of Labour-I, Chennai, has to be set aside and the civil miscellaneous appeal has to be allowed.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent would contend that the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation/Deputy Commissioner of Labour-I, Chennai - 6, after considering the entire evidence adduced on the side of the claimants, awarded appropriate compensation and therefore, there is no illegality or infirmity in the award passed by the Commissioner, and hence, the award passed by the Commissioner has to be confirmed and the appeal has to be dismissed.
5. This Court has considered the arguments made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent and perused the entire materials.
6. In this case, the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation/Deputy Commissioner of Labour-I, Chennai, after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, correctly fixed the age and income of the deceased and awarded a sum of Rs.4,11,900/- towards compensation to the claimants and the said sum is just and reasonable and in any way, it cannot be termed as excessive. Hence, the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company that the amount awarded by the Commissioner is excessive is not at all acceptable. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the award passed by the Commissioner which does not warrant any interference by this Court and hence, the civil miscellaneous appeal deserves to be dismissed.
7. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed by confirming the award dated 07.03.2005 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour-I), Chennai - 6, in W.C.No.13 of 2003. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
20.03.2017 Internet : Yes Jrl To
1. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, (Deputy Commissioner of Labour-I, Chennai - 600 006.
2. The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court, Madras.
G.CHOCKALINGAM, J.
Jrl C.M.A.No.4197 of 2005 20.03.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in