Workmen's Compensation Act | Sudden Death When There Was No Indication Of Previous Disease Treated As Stress Of Work: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The appeal was filed against an order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-1. The Respondents were the applicants before the Commissioner and had claimed Rs. 4,00,000 for their deceased relative, who worked as a driver for Opposite Party 1, who was insured by Opposite Party 2, the insurance company and appellant.

Opposite Party 1 had admitted the employment of the deceased as a driver for a school van. Opposite Party 2 filed a counter affidavit, denying most of the submissions made in the claim application by the Applicants-Claimants. Opposite party 2-Insurance Company filed its counter affidavit denying the fact that the deceased had died during the course of the employment under the opposite party no. 1.

The doctor who was examined as witness categorically stated that the deceased died due to heart failure. The deceased fell down on the steering and the bus had to be stopped. The Assistant Commissioner after considering the evidence observed that the deceased died during the course of employment and awarded an amount of Rs.3,03,509/-.

The appellant filed an appeal on the ground that the deceased had not died due to accident and that he had died due to heart failure. They argued that there was no evidence to show that the deceased had died due to stress and strain of the work. The Insurance Company relied on the Supreme Court ruling in Shakuntala Chandrakanth Sreshti Vs Prabhakar Maruti Garvali and another in which it was held that medical opinion would be relevant in making the conclusion as to whether a person died due to an accident.

The Assistant Commissioner had come to the finding that the deceased died because of a heart failure, relying on the evidence of the doctor in the post mortem report. The Court found that it was clear that the deceased was the driver of a school van and had died in the bus while driving the bus. The Court stated that the deceased was undoubtedly involved in a strenuous job. He had no history of cardiac diseases. The Court stated that when there is no indication of previous disease, any sudden death caused is to be treated as stress and strain.

In the instant case, there was no evidence to show that the deceased had suffered any ill health prior to the accident and hence, his death will be treated to have occurred during the course of employment. This makes his legal heirs entitled to compensation.

The Court noted that the Workmen's Compensation Act is a beneficial legislation and the Court cannot dwell deep into the issues in while awarding compensation. The findings recorded by the Commissioner that the deceased had died due to heart attack is purely a finding of fact based on the material on record, not based on surmises and conjectures, the Court added. It was held that when a finding is recorded by the Commissioner - as to the nature of work and whether the deceased had suffered heart attack arising out of and during the course of the employment - was not open to challenge unless perversity is apparent on the face of the record. An appeal under Section 30 of the Act itself was found unmaintainable. The judgment relied upon by the appellant was found unapplicable to the present case as the deceased had no history of cardiac issues and there was no evidence to demonstrate that. The appeal was dismissed.

Case Title: NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD v. SAMBIREDDY VENKATARAMANA 5 ORS

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AP) 94