Partly allowed

Smt. Kalawati Devi and Another v. Regional Manager and Another

Uttarakhand HC15 Dec 2017AO/442/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Uttarakhand allowed an appeal against an award by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner. The court modified the award to grant interest at the statutory rate of 12% per annum from the date of the accident, reprimanding the Commissioner for awarding 8% interest contrary to Section 4-A of the Workmen Compensation Act.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award modified to grant interest at 12% per annum on `2,99,340/- from 11.08.2006 till actual payment.

Smt. Kalawati Devi and Another Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Uttarakhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Appeal from Order No.442 of 2008

¶3

Smt. Kalawati Devi & Anr.

¶4

…..Appellants

¶5

Versus

¶6

Regional Manager, U.S.R.T.C. & Anr.

¶7

….Respondents

¶8

Mr. Neeraj Uprety, Advocate for the appellants Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate for respondent no.2 None is present for respondent no.1, despite service

¶9

Hon’ble Lok Pal Singh, J.

¶10

This appeal, under Section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act, has been preferred against the part of judgment and award dated 09.09.2008 passed by Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner/District Magistrate, Pithoragarh, in W.C. Case no.10/2006, whereby the learned Commissioner has allowed the claim to the extent of ` 2,99,340/- against the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. (respondent no.2) and it has been directed that the amount of compensation shall be paid by respondent no.2 within one month of the date of order, failing which, the claimants shall be entitled for interest on the amount of compensation @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition, i.e., 04.10.2006, till the date of its realization.

¶11

The Court finds that this appeal was admitted on 10.11.2008 but at the time of admitting the appeal, no substantial question of law was framed by the Court, however, it has been framed in the memo of appeal, as follows:

¶12

¶13

“Whether the Workman Compensation Commissioner can pass any order beyond the statutory provisions of Workman Compensation Act?”

¶14

In such circumstances, this appeal is being heard on the above substantial question of law.

¶15

By the impugned Award, learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner has awarded conditional interest on the amount of compensation. It has been directed by the learned Commissioner that if the amount of compensation is not paid within one month of the passing of the Award, the same will carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of Award till the date actual payment is made.

¶16

Section 4-A of Workmen’s Compensation Act is relevant and is reproduced hereunder:

¶17

“4-A Compensation to be paid when due and penalty for default.-

¶18

(1) Compensation under section 4 shall be paid as soon as it falls due.

¶19

(2) In cases where the employer does not accept the liability for compensation to the extent claimed, he shall be bound to make provisional payment based on the extent of liability which he accepts, and, such payment shall be deposited with the Commissioner or made to the workman, as the case may be, without prejudice to the right of the workman to make any further claim.

¶20

(3) Where any employer is in default in paying the compensation due under this Act within one month from the date it fell due, the Commissioner shall-

¶21

(a) direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears, pay simple interest thereon at the rate of twelve percent per annum or at such higher rate not exceeding the maximum of the lending rates

¶22

¶23

of any scheduled bank as may be specified by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, on the amount due; and

¶24

(b) if, in his opinion, there is no justification for the delay, direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears and interest thereon, pay a further sum not exceeding fifty per cent of such amount by way of penalty.

¶25

Provided that an order for the payment of penalty shall not be passed under clause (b) without giving a reasonable opportunity to the employer to show cause why it should not be passed.”

¶26

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Siby George and others, reported in (2012) 12 SCC 540, has held that the relevant date of payment of compensation is the date of incident.

¶27

In the present case, the accident occurred on 11.08.2006 when the deceased Kaushal Singh Maher, who was in employment with respondent no.1, met with an accident during the course of employment. From the perusal of Section 4A of the Act, it would reveal that compensation shall be paid to the injured or to the dependents, in case of death, within 30 days from the date of accident and where compensation is not paid within 30 days, the Workmen Compensation Commissioner shall direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears, pay simple interest thereon at the rate of twelve percent per annum or at such higher rate not exceeding the maximum of the lending rates of any scheduled bank as may be specified by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, on the amount due.

¶28

¶29

In the present case, admittedly, compensation has not been paid within 30 days of the accident. Thus, the claimant was constrained to file the claim petition before the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, but the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, without following the statutory provisions of Section 4-A of the Act, has passed the impugned Award. The Workmen Compensation Commissioner has awarded conditional interest @ 8 % per annum on the amount of compensation, which is against the statutory provisions of Act. The appellant-claimant is entitled for interest @ 12% per annum from the date of accident, i.e., from 11.08.2006 till the date of its realization.

¶30

Accordingly, the impugned judgment and award dated 09.09.2008 passed by Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner/District Magistrate, Pithoragarh, in W.C. case no.10/2006, is modified to the extent that the claimants shall be entitled to get the compensation, as awarded by the court below, i.e., `2,99,340/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from 11.08.2006 till the date actual payment is made.

¶31

Appeal is disposed of, as above. Substantial question of law is answered accordingly.

¶32

In the facts and circumstances, parties shall bear their own cost.

¶33

(Lok Pal Singh, J.) 15.12.2017

¶34

Rajni

Smt. Kalawati Devi and Another v. Regional Manager and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kalawati Devi and Another v. Regional Manager 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

New India Assurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Meena Joshi and Ors.

Cantonment Board Landour Cantt Vs Deepak Kumar Saxena

Cantonment Board Landour Cantt Vs Deepak Kumar Saxena

Smt Janki Devi Vs Narendra Singh and Another

Lalit Singh Vs State

State Of Uttarakhand Vs Kamal Nayan Kalra