Insurer has to compensate kin of driver who died while sleeping inside lorry: K'taka HC
Bengaluru, Sep 21: Disposing an appeal filed in 2010, the High Court of Karnataka has ruled that the driver of a lorry who died while sleeping inside the vehicle due to a heart attack, was still entitled to the compensation payable by insurer of the vehicle.
Eranna, a lorry driver, had died at Idya village near Suratkal where he had halted the vehicle and was sleeping. He died of cardiac arrest which the subsequent post-mortem report proved.
The insurance company claimed that he had "died due to cardiac failure and not due to accidental death and he was taking intoxicated drugs, which is not covered under the policy", and hence it was not liable to pay the compensation.
Dismissing this contention, the HC said: "Usage of the vehicle does not mean that at the time of his death he need not necessarily drive the vehicle, but in casual connection of his employment he was sleeping in the lorry."
"While taking rest he suffered heart attack and hence, very contention of insurance company cannot be accepted that it is not liable to pay the compensation," the court said.
The National Insurance Company had approached the High Court against the order of the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Bagalkote. In his order on August 20, 2009, the Commissioner had awarded a compensation of Rs 3,03,620 to the wife and three minor children of the deceased, payable by the insurance company.
The judgement delivered by Justice H P Sandesh recently pointed out that Eranna "was sleeping in the vehicle itself and the fact that he was working the very same day is not in dispute and the owner has also admitted that he died during the course of employment."
Citing an earlier judgement of the HC, the court said that "driving job is undoubtedly a tension filled job, particularly, to cope up with present day traffic and other things. There cannot be any presumption that even when a person dies while actually working in the job that his death may not be due to employment, but may be due to something else. Such presumption is nothing short of a perversity."
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
CJI's advice to aspirant: Join the bar, become a lawyer, don't hanker for judicial services post
New Delhi (PTI): She came to the Supreme Court seeking a re-evaluation of her paper in the examination for joining judicial services as a magistrate. What she got instead was a rejection — and a candid confession by the Chief Justice that he too had wanted to join the judicial services in his youth but was advised by a senior judge to become a lawyer instead.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi on Friday dismissed a plea filed by Prerna Gupta, the judicial services aspirant.
As Gupta pressed her case, the CJI intervened and said, "Let me share my personal story and I hope you will go happily as we cannot allow your petition."
He recounted his time as a final-year law student in 1984 when he wanted to become a judicial officer. As per requirement, he cleared the written test and was set to appear for an interview.
Judicial services is one of the two routes to become a judge after initially joining as a magistrate in lower court and thereafter rising through the ranks to become judge in a high court and possibly the Supreme Court.
The other route is to join the Bar, which means becoming a lawyer, and after building a reputation be picked from the Bar to become a judge at a senior level.
By the time the CJI's exam results came out, he had started practising at the Punjab and Haryana High Court when he was called for the interview.
The senior-most judge on the interview panel happened to be a judge before whom he had recently argued two significant matters.
"One of the matters was Sunita Rani vs Baldev Raj, where he had allowed my appeal in a matrimonial case and set aside the decree of divorce granted by the District Judge on the ground of schizophrenia," he noted.
Before the interview could take place, the judge called the young Surya Kant to his chamber and asked, 'Do you want to become a judicial officer?'
"I said 'yes.' He immediately said, 'Get out from (my) the chamber.'"
The courtroom fell silent as the CJI Justice described his initial heartbreak.
“I came out trembling. All my dreams were shattered. I thought he had snubbed me and that my career was over,” the CJI said.
However, the story took another turn the following day and the judge summoned him again, this time offering a piece of advice that would change the trajectory of his life.
“He said, ‘If you want to become (a judge), you are welcome. But my advice is, don’t become a judicial officer. The Bar is waiting for you,’” Justice Surya Kant recalled.
The CJI said he decided to skip his interview and didn't even tell his parents at first, fearing their disappointment, and instead chose to dedicate himself to his practice as an advocate.
“Now tell me did I make a bad right or bad decision,” the CJI asked and the litigant lawyer left the court with a smile on her face despite her case being dismissed.
Encouraging the petitioner to look toward the future rather than dwelling on the re-evaluation of a single paper, Justice Surya Kant said, "The Bar has much to offer."
