High Court Kerala High Court

Ivamani.K vs N.K.Sainudheen on 24 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
Ivamani.K vs N.K.Sainudheen on 24 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MFA.No. 1070 of 2000(B)



1. IVAMANI.K.
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. N.K.SAINUDHEEN
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.PROMY KAPRAKKATT

                For Respondent  :SRI.A.C.DEVY

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :24/11/2008

 O R D E R
                     M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
              = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                M.A.C.A. NO. 1070 OF 2000
            = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
       Dated this the 24th day of November, 2008.

                     J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the order of the

Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Thrissur in

W.C.C.60/97. The claimant, a driver by profession,

sustained injuries in a road accident. The insurance

company disputed the employer-employee relationship so

also the entitlement to get compensation. The application

was dismissed by the Compensation Commissioner holding

that the claimant has not succeeded in proving his

entitlement under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The

nature of injuries sustained by the claimant are only some

contusions, abrasions and lacerations. Under S.4(1)(c) of

the Workmen’s compensation Act, in order to enable the

claimant to get compensation he will be able to prove that

the injury has resulted in the loss of earning capacity and it

must be evidenced by medical certificate and proved by the

same. Unfortunately, in this case not even a scrap of paper

M.F.A. 1070 OF 2000
-:2:-

showing any disability is produced and there is no materials

to show that the injury had affected the claimant’s earning

capacity in any manner. Therefore he has not succeeded in

proving the ingredients necessary to award him a

compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

What is precisely done by the Compensation Commissioner is

the same and it does not call for interference. Therefore the

appeal lacks merit and it is dismissed.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-

M.F.A. 1070 OF 2000
-:3:-

M.N. KRISHNAN, J.

= = = = = = = = = =
M.F.A. No. 1070 OF 2000
= = = = = = = = = = =

J U D G M E N T

24th November, 2008.