HARIJAN MANGRI SIDDAKKA AND ORS.versusORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANR.

                             [2008] 10 S.C.R. 1099
 -Ir-

                  HARIJAN MANGRI SIDDAKKA AND ORS.                        A
                                       v.
                ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANR.
                     (Civil Appeal No. 4437 of 2008)
                                JULY 16, 2008
                                                                          B
          [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND HARJIT SINGH BEDI, JJ.]

                Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - S.30(1) - Load-
          ing of mud in trailor of tractor- Huge quantity of mud collapsed
          from quarry - Resulting in death of workmen - Claim for com-. c
        . pensation - Held: Claimants required to show that there was.
          use of motor vehicle at time of accident and there was casual
          connection between death of the workmen and use of the ve-
          hicle - On facts, since factual position not analyzed in great
          detail, matter remitted to High Court to deal with the matter
                                                                           D
          afresh.
              The Appellants filed claim petition claiming compen-
        sation in respect of certain workmen who had lost their
        lives. According to the Appellants, the deceased persons
        were employed as workmen in a tractor-trailor and when E
        the trailor was being loaded with mud from quarry, a huge
        quantity of mud had collapsed from the quarry resulting
        in death of the workmen. The Commiss·ioner for
        Workmen's Compensation held that the accident had
        taken place during and in the course of employment of F
-r      the deceased persons and since the vehicle was being
        used for purposes of loading, the insurance comp~ny,
        with which the vehicle was insured, was liable to indem-
        nify the award passed.· On appeal under s.30(1) of the
        Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, the High Court held
                                                                    G
        that there was no actual use of the vehicle and, therefore,
        there was no casual connection between. death of the
A-
        workmen and use of the vehicle. Hence the present ap-
        peals.
                                      1099                                H
    1100       SUPREME COURT REPORTS             [2008) 10 S.C.R.


A       AUowing the appeal and remitting the matter to High
    Court, the Court
       HELD: There is practically no discussion on the fac-
  tual scenario as to whether there was any connection
  between the death and the use of the vehicle. It would
8 depend upon the factual scenario in each case and there
  cannot be any strait jacket formula to be applied. The ex-
  pression "use" in the Statute is with reference to "use of
  the motor vehicle". Whether there was a use of the motor
  vehicle has to be factually analysed .. Since in this case
C the factual position has not been examined in detail, it
  would be appropriate for the High Co!Jrt to deal with the
  matter afresh. [Paras 4-5] [1101-F,G,H; 1102-A]
       CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4437
D of 2008
         From the Judgment and final Order dated 16.11.2005 of
    the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in M.F.A. No. 487/
    2004 (W.C.) c/w M.F.A. No. 483/2004 (W.C:)
           Kiran Suri for the Appellants.
E
           S.N. Bhat for the Respondents.
           The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
           Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted.
F       2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a
  learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court disposing of
  an appeal filed under Section 30(1) of Workmen's Cpmpensa-
  tion Act, 1928 (in short the 'Act'). The appellants lodged claim
  petition claiming compensation in respect of certain persons
G who had lost their lives. According to the appellants the de-
  ceased persons were employed as workmen/labourer in a trac-
  tor and trailor combination which was the subject matter of in-
  surance. When the trailor was being loaded with mud from the
  quarry, huge quantity of mud had collapsed from the quarry
H smothering the workmen to death. The Commissioner for
           HARIJAN MANGRI SIDDAKKA & ORS. v. ORIENTAL 1101
        INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR. [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]

     Workmen's Compensation (in short the 'Commissioner') held A
     that the accident had taken place during and in the course of
     the employment and since the vehicle has been used for pur-
     poses of loading, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. were
     liable to indemnify the award made. The Insurer challenged the
4-   correctness of the award taking the stand that the liability of the B
     insurer arises on account of death on a bodily injury arising out
     of the use of the vehicle and in the present case the admitted
     circumstances indicate that there was no proximate connec-
     tion between the use of the vehicle and the actual cause of death
     which was overlooked by the Commissioner. Stand of the ap- c
     pellants was that the insurer is not correct in submitting that there
     was no use of the vehicle at the time of accident. It was pointed
     out that though the death occurred at a place away from the
     vehicle or the,fact that the mud which was being loaded on to
     the trailor from the quarry had killed the workmen, is immaterial
                                                                           D
     since the policy of the Insurance is intended to cover the risk of
     workmen employed in the vehicle. The High Court found that
     there was no actual use of the vehicle and therefore there was
     no casual connection between the cause of death and the use
                                                             .
     of the vehicle.                                       ~-"":''--




                                                                           E
           3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that no rea-
     son has been indicated by the High Court to hold that there was
     no casual connection between the death and the use of the ve-
     hicle. Reference is made to certain judgments of the High Court
     where the view expressed by learned Single Judge was not F
     accepted.
            4. We find that there is practically no discussion on the
     factual scenario as to whether there was any connection be-
     tween the death and the use of the vehicle. It would depend
     upon the factual scenario in each case and there cannot be any G
     strait jacket formula to be applied.
~
           5. The expression "use" in the Statute is with reference to
     "use of the motor vehicle". Whether there was a use of the mo-
     tor vehicle has to be factually analysed. Since in this case the
                                                                          H
    1102     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2008] 10 S.C.R.


A   factual position has not been examined in detail, it would be
    appropriate for the High Court to deal the matter afresh. Ac-
    cordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment and remit the
    matter to the High Court.
       6. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opin-
B ion on the merits of the case. Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid
  extent. No costs.
    B.B.B.                                        Appeal allowed.