Dismissed

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. K.Mohanan

Kerala HC19 Mar 2014MFA (ECC)/176/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal against an order directing payment of compensation with 12% interest. The court held that no evidence of a contractual clause exempting the insurer from interest liability was produced, rendering the appeal devoid of merit.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; insurer directed to pay compensation with interest standing by impugned order.

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs K.Mohanan — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/28TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶7

MFA.No. 176 of 2011 ( )

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 04-12-2010 IN W.C.C 123/2003 of THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION COMMISSIONER, PALAKKAD

¶9

APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.2:

¶10

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. MUNDUKOTTACKAL CHAMBERS, KANJIKUZHY, KOTTAYAM 686001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.KKM.SHERIF

¶12

SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SRI.V.R.REKESH

¶13

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NO.1:

¶14

1. K.MOHANAN PILLAI, S/O.KUTTAPPA KURUP VAYALARIKATH PUTHAN VEEDU, MELILA DESOM, PO MELILA PIN 691 508.

¶15

2. SRI.K.A.ABRAHAM,MANAGING DIRECTOR, POABS GRANITE PRODUCTS, W.OTHERA, THIRUVALLA.

¶16

R2 BY ADV. SRI.N.JAMES KOSHY

¶17

THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

K.M.JOSEPH &

¶19

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JJ.

¶20

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M.F.A.(WCC).No.176 of 2011

¶21

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 19^th day of March, 2014

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

K.M.JOSEPH, J.

¶24

Appellant is the insurer. In the proceedings under Section 22 of the Employees Compensation Act by the impugned order, the Commissioner has directed the appellant to pay the amount with compensation with simple interest at 12%.

¶25

We heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the employer.

¶26

The learned counsel for the appellant pressed before

¶27

us the substantial question of law relating to liability to pay interest. The argument apparently was premised in pursuance of a Clause in the contract that insurance will not include liability to pay interest. But, we find that there is no evidence made available in the form of that Clause permitting the appellant to contend that appellant is not liable to pay interest.

¶28

M.F.A.(WCC).No.176 of 2011 -2-

¶29

In such circumstances, there is no merit in the case and

¶30

the appeal stands dismissed.

¶31

K.M.JOSEPH

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶34

mns/

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. K.Mohanan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. K.Mohanan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balakrishnan Vs Madhavan

M. Shajideen Vs State of Kerala

Afsal Abdulkhader Vs District Collector

P.v.Kunheebi Vs v.S.Koyattil

Jacky Vs Gracy

The National Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Padmanabhan Karintha