A labour court in the city has ordered an employer and an insurance company to pay a compensation of Rs. 17.5 lakh to a driver-cum-cleaner who met with an accident during the course of work.
The employer has been directed to pay an additional penalty upto 25 percent for failing to pay the compensation within a month of the accident as required by law.
The court noted that it reveals from medical papers that the applicant sustained various serious fractures and underwent treatment for a huge span of time. It also considered that his doctor deposed before it that the fractures he sustained have not united and he is unable to drive any vehicle. The former driver, the doctor said, is also unable to walk without the help of a walker.
It also noted that due to the accident he had sustained serious injuries such as fractures including those to the bone below the knee, thigh bone, pelvic fracture, rib fracture, urethral injury and trauma to the chest, abdomen and pelvis.
Judge PS Kulkarni said that the applicant had succeeded in proving the case with respect to the disabilities and that it has resulted in him losing 100 percent earning capacity.
The court said that in the case at hand, the employer was well within the knowledge of accidental injuries received by his employee and he neither paid nor deposited the compensation amount within stipulated time in collaboration with the insurance company. It imposed a 25 percent penalty upon the employer, stating it would be just and proper.
Amardev Verma was 24-years-old at the time of the accident in February 2018. He had sustained multiple fractures and serious injuries in the accident which had left him with 68 percent permanent partial disability. After the accident he had been admitted to Mahatma Gandhi Mission Hospital and thereafter to KEM hospital and his treatment expenditure had come to Rs. 3.65 lakh.
In his application before the labour court in May 2018, he said that his employer had not considered his request for compensation. He had lost full earning capacity due to the incident, he stated. His advocate told the court that he was unable to drive any type of vehicle or engage in hard work like cleaning.
The employer stated to the court that the vehicle was insured at the time of the accident and the liability of paying compensation is on the insurance company. The insurance company, on the other hand, had denied that the accident occurred during course of work as well as denied that Verma was employed by his employer.
