FAO No.1503 of 2009 (O&M) -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1503 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision:04.01.2011. The Panipat Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., Panipat ...Appellant Versus Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON’B LE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Amit Shivren, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Subhash Goyal, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Raj Kaushik, Advocate, for respondent No.2. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This appeal is directed against the order dated 30.01.2009 passed by the Commissioner under the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 [for short “the Act”] by which an amount of `3,60,690/- has been awarded to the claimant, out of which, an amount of `2,92,400/- has been ordered to be paid by respondent No.2 (Insurance Company) and the amount of interest of `65,790/- was ordered to be paid by the appellant as the Insurance Company was absolved from the payment of interest and funeral expenses. It was also directed that if the amount of compensation is not paid after one month from the date of communication, the claimant would be entitled to future interest @ 12% per annum from the respondents. In the present appeal, the grievance of the appellant is confined to the amount of interest only. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted FAO No.1503 of 2009 (O&M) -2- **** that the Insurance Company is liable to indemnify the appellant for the amount of interest as well because it is not excluded from the insurance policy. In this regard, he has relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of Ajay Vs. Balwan Singh and another, 2010(2) P.L.R. 168. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1/Insurance Company has very fairly stated that the component of interest was not specifically excluded in the insurance policy. In view thereof, it is submitted that the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the appellant in the case of Ajay (supra) covers the present controversy. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the present case is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Ajay (supra) in which it has been held that if the liability to pay interest is not excluded in the insurance policy, the Insurance Company shall be liable to pay the interest and there would be no liability of the insured. Hence, the present appeal is allowed. The order of the Commissioner under the Act is modified to the extent that the component of interest awarded by the Commissioner to the claimant shall also be paid by the Insurance Company and not by the appellant. No other point has been raised. No costs. January 04, 2011. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE