Partly allowed

The Manager, Maharashtra Tourism Dev.Corporation v. Shri Subhash Gajanan Rane and Another

Bombay HC11 Apr 2005FA/412/1992

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeal under Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, the question arose regarding the interest rate awarded on workmen compensation. The court relied on a Supreme Court judgment holding that interest rates must be reduced due to lower fixed deposit rates currently available in the economy. The High Court held that the awarded compensation remains intact but reduced the interest rate applicable to th

What did the court decide?

The compensation awarded by the tribunal to Respondent No.1 remains as it is. The rate of interest shall be at 9% p.a.

The Manager, Maharashtra Tourism Dev.Corporation Vs… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO.412 OF 1992.

¶5

 Manager, Maharashtra Tourisum

¶6

 Development Corporation, Bombay

¶7

 & Anr. : Appellants.

¶8

 versus

¶9

 Subhash Gajanan Rane & Anr. : Respondents.

¶10

 Mr.S.N.Gawade, AGP, for the appellants.

¶11

 Mr.A.G.Toraskar for Respondent No.1.

¶12

 Mr.G.S.Hegade with Mr.Lokesh for Respondent No.2

¶13

CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE,J.

¶14

 DATED : 11th APRIL 2005.

¶15

ORAL ORDER

¶16

 1. Heard Mr.Gawade, the learned AGP

¶17

 appearing for the appellants and Mr.Toraskar, the
 counsel appearing for Respondent No.1.
 Respondent No.1 suffered from an accident.
 According to the Doctor it was a disability to

¶18

¶19

 the extent of 90% because there was paralysis to

¶20

 the right hand of respondent No.1. He was
 serving at that time as supervisor but as a
 result of accident he was reduced to the post of
 clerk. His salary was Rs.1400/- per month at
 that time. The net loss, because of the
 reduction in rank, was Rs.527/- per month. At
 the time of accident his age was 38 years. The
 tribunal, therefore, calculated monthly loss of
 Rs.527/- for a period of 20 years next i.e. up
 to the date of his retirement and awarded him
 compensation of Rs.One lac. It is this order
 that is challenged by the appellants.

¶21

 2. The learned AGP contended that as per
 Schedule I Part II of the Workmen’s Compensation
 Act 1923 at Sr.No.4 for loss of hand, the
 percentage of loss of earning capacity is shown
 to the extent of 60, and therefore, the tribunal
 erred in awarding compensation of Rs.One lac. If
 this argument is accepted and if the claimant was
 earning Rs.1400/- per month as per his
 application, then loss would be Rs.840/- per
 month and if he was to serve up to the period of
 20 years next, then compensation would be more
 than Rs.One lac. Further the tribunal has not

¶22

¶23

 taken into consideration the further prospects of

¶24

 promotion and increase in salary. The
 compensation has been calculated at flat rate of
 Rs.527/- per month. Therefore, the order does
 not require any interference. There is no
 illegally.

¶25

 3. So far as interest part is concerned, the
 learned AGP relied upon the judgment of Supreme
 Court reported in 2001 ACJ 428 [Kaushnuma Begum
 and others v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and
 others] wherein it has been held by the Supreme
 Court that with a change in economy the banks
 have lowered the rates of interest on fixed
 deposits. In that case also earlier 12% interest
 was awarded by the tribunal but the Supreme Court
 reduced it to 9%. In view of this judgment of
 the Supreme Court, the rate of interest has to be
 reduced and it should be 9% p.a. Hence the
 order:_-

¶26

 :ORDER:

¶27

 The appeal is partly allowed.

¶28

¶29

 The compensation awarded by the tribunal

¶30

 to Respondent No.1 to remain as it is.

¶31

 The rate of interest shall be at 9% p.a.

¶32

 No order as to costs.

¶33

 [D.G.DESHPANDE]

¶34

 11/04/2005 JUDGE.

The Manager, Maharashtra Tourism Dev.Corporation v. Shri Subhash Gajanan Rane and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Manager, Maharashtra Tourism Dev.Corporation v. Shri Subhash Gajanan Rane and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra. Vs Sou.J.v.Gaikwad Thr.P.a.Mr.R.G.Chavan.

Suvarna Jayawantrao @Jayant Patil and Ors. Vs M. Malayapan and Anr.

Mohrabai Dada Chatke Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs 1. Dagady Rustom Kashi and Others

The State of Maharashtra Vs 1. Dagady Rustom Kashi and Others

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. Vs Smt.K.D.Luthriya and Ors.