Andhra High Court Affirms Compensation in Workmen’s Compensation Act Case, Declares ‘Driving License Irrelevant’ in Nature of Accident”

Andhra Pradesh High Court upholds the Commissioner’s decision, holding the insurance company liable despite issues with driving licenses of the deceased and the responsible driver.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has dismissed an appeal by the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, affirming the compensation awarded by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation in a case involving the death of a driver in a work-related accident. The judgment, delivered by Justice Nyapathy Vijay, emphasized that the nature of the accident rendered the validity of the deceased’s driving license irrelevant, thus holding the insurance company liable for compensation.

The deceased, A. Akthar Hussain, was employed as a driver with a monthly salary of Rs. 3,000/-. On June 18, 2004, while checking the load ropes of a stationary lorry after having a meal, he was crushed to death when another driver negligently reversed the vehicle, causing a collision with another parked lorry. The accident led to an immediate death, prompting his dependents to file for compensation amounting to Rs. 3,00,000. The insurance company contested the claim, primarily on the grounds of fake driving licenses for both the deceased and the negligent driver.

The court addressed the insurance company’s argument regarding the fake driving licenses, stating, “In an accident of this nature, it is immaterial whether the deceased was having a fake driving licence or a valid driving licence as the accident occurred not on account of the deceased driving the vehicle.”

Justice Vijay noted, “It is not for the insurance company to question the employer/employee relationship and the nature of employment,” indicating that the insurance company’s argument about the employment status was invalid in this context.

The court referred to precedents set by the Supreme Court in similar cases, emphasizing that the insurer cannot be absolved of liability merely due to a fake driving license unless it is proven that the employer knowingly permitted the use of such a license. “The mere fact that the licence is fake, per se, would not absolve the insurer,” the judgment cited from the Supreme Court ruling in Ram Chandra Singh v. Rajaram and others.

“The owner hiring the driver can only be expected to examine the license. If the driving licence looks genuine on the face of it, he cannot be expected to enquire in the RTO Office about its genuineness,” Justice Vijay stated, reiterating the onus on the employer to perform due diligence.

The court’s dismissal of the appeal underscores a significant stance on the relevance of driving licenses in work-related accidents. By affirming the lower court’s decision, the judgment reinforces the principle that insurance companies cannot shirk their liability based on technicalities of license validity, especially in cases where the accident’s nature makes the license’s validity inconsequential. This decision is anticipated to have a lasting impact on future compensation claims under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

Date of Decision: 01.07.2024

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd v. A Shamshad Begum &