HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1374 of 2003 Date: 20-12-2010 Between Athenjeri Jayaramulu and another … Appellants/Claimants and The Manager, G.E.M. Granite Company, R.L. Puram village, Cheemakurthy Mandal, Prakasam district … Respondent/Opposite Party HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1374 of 2003 Judgment: This appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (for short ‘the W.C. Act’) against the order dated 02-3-2002 in W.C.No.11 of 2001 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Cuddapah. 2. The relevant facts leading to this appeal are: The deceased Ramesh was a workman in the GEM Granite Company belonging to the respondent. He died due to drowning in a pond while he was on duty as workman under the respondent. The parents of the deceased filed W.C.No.11 of 2001 claiming compensation of Rs.2,22,710/- on the ground that the deceased was getting Rs.100/- per day. 3. The respondent-Company contended that the deceased was not their regular employee and that the death did not occur during the course of employment and therefore, it is not liable to pay any compensation. 4. Considering the evidence on record, the Commissioner awarded compensation of Rs.1,10,418/-. 5. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner, the appellants, who are the parents of the deceased, filed this appeal claiming balance compensation of Rs.1,12,292/-. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that immediately after the accident and death of the deceased, the respondent-Company paid Rs.20,000/- to the appellants towards compensation. Therefore, it can safely be inferred that the deceased was under the employment of the respondent-Company. In the evidence, B.W.1 has admitted that they have paid an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the parents of the deceased towards compensation. 7. As per Explanation II of Section 4 of the W.C. Act, where the monthly wages of a workman exceed two thousand rupees, his monthly wages for the purposes of Clause (a) and Clause (b) shall be deemed to be two thousand rupees only. Admittedly, the death occurred in the year 1997 i.e., prior to 2000. Therefore, the monthly wages of the deceased would be taken at Rs.2,000/- per month and applying the relevant multiplier of ‘221.37’ for half of the salary it comes to Rs.2,21,370/-. 8. The Commissioner has taken the wages of the deceased only at Rs.994/- without any basis. A.W.1-father of the deceased, A.W.2-Ch.Krupa Rao, co-worker of the deceased and A.W.3- K.Chennaiah clearly deposed in their evidence that the deceased was getting Rs.100/- per day as wages. The Commissioner has not assigned any reasons for taking the wages of the deceased at Rs.994/- per month and there was no basis for taking the wages at Rs.994/- per month. As per Explanation II of Section 4 of the W.C. Act, the wages of the deceased would be Rs.2,000/- per month. Admittedly, the deceased was a skilled worker being a rod-bender. 9. Therefore, taking into consideration the minimum wages as per Explanation II of Section 4 of the W.C. Act, the appellants, who are the parents of the deceased, are entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,21,370/-. Since the Commissioner awarded Rs.1,10,418/- the appellants are entitled to recover the balance compensation of Rs.1,10,952/- from the respondent with costs and interest at 7½% per annum from the date of filing of the application till passing of the order and thereafter, at 12% per annum till realization as per the judgment of the apex Court in ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. V. MOHD. NASIR[1]. 10. The civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed accordingly. ___________________________ JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO 20th December, 2010. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1374 of 2003 20th December, 2010. [1] (2009) 6 SCC 280