Allowed

Nemi Chand v. Anil Kumar and Anr.

Rajasthan HC6 Aug 2018CMA/1817/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appellant's appeal, directing the respondents to enhance compensation from Rs. 8,667 to Rs. 52,058 plus interest, based on statutory rules for loss of earning capacity for amputation of two fingers.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to deposit Rs. 52,058 plus interest for amputation of two fingers, failing which interest at 15%. Aggregate directed within two weeks.

Nemi Chand Vs Anil Kumar and Anr. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1817/2011

¶3

Nemichand S/o Shri Devilal Regar, R/o Village Lakhina, Post Piplaj Via Kharwa, Tehsil Beawar, District Ajmer

¶4

----Claimant/Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Anil Kumar Proprietor/partner/manager/authorized representative Of M/s. Guru Metals , RIICO Industrial Area, Near Purani Chungi Naka, Ajmer Road, Beawar

¶7

Ashok Kumar Proprietor/partner/manager/authorized representative Of M/s. Guru Metals, RIICO Industrial Area, Near Purani Chungi Naka, Ajmer Road, Beawar

¶8

----Non-claimant/Respondents

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Chain Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Sharma on behalf of Mr. J.P. Gupta

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA

¶11

Order

¶12

06/08/2018

¶13

Appellant- petitioner- claimant Nemichand preferred this misc. appeal against the impugned judgment dated 28.11.2008 passed by learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Beawar in Case No. WCA/NF/32/2005 whereby the claim petition filed by the respondents was partly allowed and compensation in the tune of Rs. 8,667/- has been awarded.

¶14

Learned counsel for the appellant- claimant Mr. Chain Singh Rathore submits that it is admitted position that appellant is employee of respondents and during course of employment he sustained injury on his right hand resulted in amputation of two fingers, for which doctor assessed permanent disablement only

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CMA-1817/2011]

¶17

3.33% while according to schedule 1^st Part II of Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, the loss of two fingers of one hand is considered as 20% loss of earning capacity.

¶18

He submits that without considering the aforesaid provision of the Act of 1923, learned tribunal awarded compensation only considering the percentage of permanent disablement certificate issued by the doctor while he should have consider the percentage of loss of earning capacity instead of permanent disablement, therefore this misc. appeal may be allowed and the claim may be enhanced.

¶19

Per contra Mr. Prashant Sharma learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. J.P. Gupta learned counsel for the respondents supported the impugned judgment and submits that permanent disablement certificate was submitted by the appellant himself wherein permanent disability is assessed as 3.33%, accordingly the award was passed, which doesn’t require any interference.

¶20

I have considered the submissions made at Bar.

¶21

So far as, percentage of disablement certificate is concerned, it is in regard to the working capacity of the injured employee but as per Schedule 1^st Part II of the Employee Compensation Act, the percentage of loss of earning capacity in case of loss of two fingers of one hand is 20%. Learned Commissioner assessed the age of appellant as 25 years and his monthly income as Rs. 2,000/-. Accordingly, the relevant factor was taken as Rs. 2,60,292 (100%).

¶22

20% of the aforesaid amount comes to Rs. 52,058/-, appellant is entitled for the aforesaid amount, on which appellant is also entitled for interest @ 12% per annum from the date of accident i.e. 05.08.2005.

¶23

(3 of 3)

¶24

[CMA-1817/2011]

¶25

Accordingly, this misc. appeal is disposed of. Respondents are directed to deposit the aforesaid amount with interest within two weeks from today, failing which interest shall be payable at the rate of 15% from today.

¶26

(BANWARI LAL SHARMA),J

¶27

S. Kumawat/39

Nemi Chand v. Anil Kumar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nemi Chand v. Anil Kumar and Anr.

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

Dhanna and Others Vs Chhitar Lal and Another

Laxman Singh and Another Vs Kan Singh and Ors.

Manoj Kumar Prajapat Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

M/S Dayal Minearls Vs Raj State Mines and Minearls Ltd.

Prem Chand Vs Satya Narain Agrawal Thr Lrs

Satyanarayan and Ors. Vs Vijay Laxmi Parashar and Ors.