SRINAGAR: The Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has upheld an award of Rs 15.74 lakh in compensation to the dependants of a tanker driver who died of cardiac arrest during a return journey from Kashmir, holding that the death was attributable to the stress and strain of his employment.
Justice Shahzad Azeem dismissed an appeal filed by Oriental Insurance Company Ltd against the June 27, 2022 award of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Rajouri, which had directed payment of Rs 15,74,400 along with 12 per cent annual interest from June 21, 2021 to June 21, 2022 to the dependants of deceased driver Khadam Hussain.
The court held that the evidence on record established a reasonable nexus between the cardiac arrest suffered by Hussain and the stress and strain associated with long-distance tanker driving. It also found that the insurer had failed to prove its allegation of a breach of the insurance policy.
According to the judgment, Hussain was employed as the driver of an oil tanker bearing registration number JK02CP-1586, owned by Abdul Hanif of Jammu. He died on May 21, 2021, at Pampore while returning from Kashmir after unloading the tanker.
The claimants, including Hussain’s wife Jan Begum, had approached the Assistant Labour Commissioner alleging that he suffered cardiac arrest because of the stress and strain of duty. The insurer disputed the claim, arguing that cardiac arrest had no sufficient connection with the deceased’s employment and that the death did not arise out of or in the course of employment.
The owner of the tanker did not appear before the labour authority despite service and was proceeded against ex parte.
The Assistant Labour Commissioner framed five issues, including whether Hussain died during and in the course of his employment, whether his dependants were entitled to compensation, his age and wages, and whether the insurer was liable.
After examining the evidence, the labour authority decided the first three issues in favour of the claimants and rejected the insurer’s defence on liability.
Before the High Court, the insurance company relied on a 2007 Supreme Court judgment, Shakuntala Chandrakant Shresti v Prabhakar Maruti Garvali, to contend that cardiac arrest could not automatically be treated as an employment-related accident.
Justice Azeem found the precedent distinguishable. The court noted that in that case there had been inadequate pleading and evidence connecting the deceased’s cardiac condition with his employment. In Hussain’s case, however, the claimants had specifically pleaded that the deceased was subjected to prolonged driving and had produced evidence regarding the nature of his work and the circumstances preceding his death.
The High Court noted that Jan Begum had testified that her husband was paid Rs 15,000 a month in wages besides Rs 100-150 a day as diet charges. She stated that he suffered cardiac arrest on May 21, 2021, while returning after unloading the tanker in Kashmir.
Her testimony was corroborated by Mohd Asif, the cleaner/conductor of the tanker, who supported the claim regarding Hussain’s employment, the journey and his collapse during the return trip.
The daily diary record and post-mortem report showed that Hussain was brought to Sub-District Hospital, Pampore, in an unconscious condition by passers-by and was declared dead due to cardiac arrest.
The High Court also noted that the insurer, on whom the burden of proving the alleged policy violation had been placed, led no evidence. Consequently, its plea of policy violation remained unproved.
The court relied on two subsequent Supreme Court decisions concerning employment-related deaths of drivers. In Mst Param Pal Singh v M/s National Insurance Co, the Supreme Court had held that a truck driver who became unwell while driving and died shortly afterwards had undergone grave strain and that the mishap was attributable to the nature of his employment.
The High Court also referred to Smt Dariyao Kanwar v M/s United India Insurance Co Ltd, in which the Supreme Court held that prolonged spells of driving could be a material contributory factor in an unexpected death and that the death could arise out of and in the course of employment.
Applying these principles, Justice Azeem held that Hussain died during the course of his employment from a heart attack attributable to stress and strain arising from his tanker-driving duties while returning from Kashmir.
Since the tanker was insured with Oriental Insurance and the insurer had failed to establish any breach of the policy, the court held that the Assistant Labour Commissioner was justified in fastening liability on the insurer to indemnify the owner.
The High Court found no substantial question of law in the appeal and held that the findings of the Assistant Labour Commissioner were neither perverse nor contrary to law.
It accordingly upheld the June 27, 2022 compensation award and dismissed the insurance company’s appeal along with any connected applications.
The judgment was reserved on September 24 and pronounced on September 28, 2026. It has been marked reportable.
