Dismissed

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Suneesh and Others

Kerala HC10 Nov 2020MFA (ECC)/94/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court dismissed an appeal by National Insurance Co. Ltd. against a Workmen's Compensation award. The appellant claimed exemption from paying interest based on policy terms, but the court found the policy did not exclude liability for interest. Thus, the Commissioner's award requiring interest payment was upheld.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed; all pending interlocutory applications were closed.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Suneesh and… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 19TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

MFA.No.94 OF 2011

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN WC 199/2005 DATED 30-09-2010 OF W.C.C.,KOZHIKODE

¶7

APPELLANT/SECOND OPPOSITE PARTY:

¶8

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. DIVISIONAL OFFICE, NO.1, PARCO TOWERS, PB NO.207, PM TAJ ROAD, CALICUT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/APPLICANTS & FIRST OPPOSITE PARTY:

¶11

1 SUNEESH, S/O.GOPALAN CHALIYANTHODI HOUSE, POST OLAVANNA,

¶12

CALICUT (EXPIRED).

¶13

2 GOPALAN, F/O.SUNEESH.

¶14

3 MALU, W/O.GOPALAN THACHARAKKAL MEETHAL HOUSE POST, OLAVANNA, CALICUT.

¶15

4 M/S.ARCADE GROUP NO.2 RANGA VILAS BUILDING, KANDAMKULAM CROSS ROAD, CALICUT.

¶16

R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN R1 BY ADV. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P

¶17

THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

M.F.A.No.94 of 2011

¶19

:-2-:

¶20

Dated this the 10^th day of November, 2020

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

The appellant National Insurance Company who is

¶23

the second opposite party in W.C.No.199/2005, challenges the award passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner on 30.9.2010. As per the award, the first opposite party was called upon to pay Rs.1,20,669/- with interest and the second

¶24

party appellant was required to make payment of compensation of Rs.4,27,827/- with 12% interest per annum.

¶25

The sole grievance raised by the appellant

¶26

relates to the interest granted by the Commissioner as per the award. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that as per the terms of workmen's policy issued, the liability of the insurer is excluded as regards the interest.

¶27

I heard the learned counsel for the

¶28

appellant and the learned counsel for respondents 2

¶29

M.F.A.No.94 of 2011

¶30

:-3-:

¶31

and 3.

¶32

I perused the insurance policy issued under

¶33

the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act,

¶34

The policy does not contain any clause excluding the liability of the insurance company. In the absence of the terms of policy excluding the liability of the insurance company, the contention that the company is not liable for payment of interest cannot be upheld. Therefore, the finding of the Commissioner that the appellant company is liable to pay interest at the rate specified in the award, is not worth interfering.

¶35

In the result, appeal fails and it is

¶36

dismissed.

¶37

All pending interlocutory applications are closed.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

T.V.ANILKUMAR JUDGE

¶40

ami/

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Suneesh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Suneesh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abida Vs Abdul Azeez

Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited Vs Jessy, W/O.Late Veerendrakumar

P.N.Joy Vs Mythily

Babu Vs Vijayan

Baby Alex Vs M/S.Ullattil Agencies

Rubeena Vs Anikkadan Moosas Son Abdul Nazar