The court held that compensation under the Act includes interest. While interest shares of the minor sons were released, the application for the widow's amount was rejected for lack of sufficient statutory grounds.
Release of interest shares to sons ordered; widow's application rejected with liberty to file fresh application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Case No :CMAppl(FA) 0000534/2014
Party Name : SMT. TRIPTI RANI GHOSH & ORS Vs NATIONAL INS. CO. LTD
HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.C.DAS
This is an application filed for release of the amount payable under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Section 8 of the Workmen’s Compensation, 1923, now renamed as the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), deals with distribution of compensation. Section 8(6), 8(7) and 8(8) of the Act read as follows:-
“ 8(6). Where any compensation deposited with the Commissioner is payable to any person, the Commissioner shall, if the person to whom the compensation is payable is not a woman or a person under a legal disability, and may, in other cases, pay the money to the person entitled thereto.
8(7). Where any lump sum deposited with the Commissioner is payable to a woman or a person under a legal disability, such sum may be invested, applied or otherwise dealt with for the benefit of the woman, or of such person during his disability, in such manner as the Commissioner may direct; and where a half-monthly payment is payable to any person under a legal disability, the Commissioner may, of his own motion or on an application made to him in this behalf, order that the payment be made during the disability to any dependant of the employee or to any other person, whom the Commissioner thinks best fitted to provide for the welfare of the employee.
8(8). Where, on application made to him in this behalf or otherwise, the Commissioner is satisfied that, on account of neglect of children on the part of a parent or on account of the variation of the circumstances of any dependant or for any other sufficient cause, an order of the Commissioner as to the distribution of any sum paid as compensation or as to the manner in which any sum payable to any such dependant is to be invested, applied or otherwise dealt with, ought to be varied, the Commissioner may make such orders for the variation of the former order as he thinks just in the circumstances of the case:
Provided that no such order prejudicial to any person shall be made unless such person has been given an opportunity of showing cause why the order should not be made, or shall be made in any case in which it would involve the repayment by a dependant of any sum already paid to him.”
A bare perusal of section 8(6) of the Act clearly shows that when any compensation is deposited with the Commissioner under the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act and such compensation is payable to a woman or a person under legal disability, then that money cannot be released in favour of the woman or a person under legal disability.
The legislature in its wisdom decided that the amount payable under the Act, if it is payable to a woman or a person suffering from a legal disability shall not be released to that person but shall be invested in terms of section 8(7) for the benefit of such woman or person suffering from legal disability. This was done because the Act deals with compensation payable to poor workmen or their heirs and if the money is given to them the same may not be used beneficially by the claimants.
Sub-section (8), however, permits the Commissioner to release an amount, if on an application being made to him or if it comes to his notice that the amount of compensation is required to be released in favour of the claimants in view of the change of circumstances or because the children are being neglected or for any other sufficient cause.
Sri S.K. Dutta, learned counsel for the applicants, submits that the amount which has been deposited is not the amount of compensation but the amount of interest and, therefore, the provisions of Section 8 will not apply.
I am not at all agreeable with this submission because compensation payable under the Act will include not only the principal amount of compensation but also the interest and penalty, if any, awarded. In the present case, out of the three claimants one is woman, the widow of the deceased workman, and two are the sons of the deceased.
The Insurance Company has deposited the amount of interest and, therefore, it is ordered that the amount falling to the shares of the two sons Sri Manish Ghosh and Sri Asish Ghosh be released to them by remitting it to their bank accounts, details whereof along with photocopy of the first page of the passbook be filed in the Registry of this Court within one month from today.
As far as the claim of Smti. Tripti Rani Ghosh is concerned, in the application no grounds as mentioned in sub-section (8) of Section 8 of the Act have been set out and, therefore, the application is rejected with liberty reserved to the claimant to file fresh application setting out grounds for release of the amount in terms of Section 8 of the Act.
CM Application stands disposed of.
Download Date: 8-05-2017 15:05
1/1
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 8 of the Employee's Compensation Act applies to interest deposited instead of lump sum compensation.
Whether sufficient grounds for release of compensation under Section 8(8) of the Act were established.
Whether the compensation amount payable to the widow should be released or invested for benefit.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SMT. TRIPTI RANI GHOSH & ORS
NATIONAL INS. CO. LTD
DEEPAK GUPTA
S.C. DAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
