HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2108 of 2003 Date: 10-12-2010 Between Smt. Vijaya Laxmi and 3 others … Appellants/Claimants and N.Suresh Reddy and another … Respondents/Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2108 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 24-12-2001 in W.C.No.75 of 2000 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad, whereby the appellants were awarded compensation of Rs.2,15,280/-. 2. The facts that gave rise to the appeal are that one Peddolla Lingaiah (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) was working as driver on the tractor bearing No.AP1C-5264 belonging to the 1st respondent, which was insured with the 2nd respondent-insurer. He succumbed to the injuries in the accident that took place on 23-7-2000 at 6 p.m., while he was in the course of employment of the 1st respondent. Though the employer had knowledge about the accident and the death of the deceased, he refused to pay the compensation. Hence, the appellants, who are the legal representatives of the deceased, filed the application under Section 22 of the W.C. Act before the Commissioner claiming compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-. 3. The 1st respondent-owner of the vehicle admitted in the counter that the deceased was working as driver and was drawing salary of Rs.3,000/- per month and the vehicle was insured with the 2nd respondent-insurer. 4. The 2nd respondent-Insurer contended that the age and the income of the deceased at the time of accident are not correct and that the claim of the appellants is excessive. 5. The 1st appellant was examined as A.W.1 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-4. The 2nd respondent-Insurer filed Ex.B-1 copy of policy admitting that the vehicle involved in the accident was insured with the 2nd respondent and therefore, the policy was in force. 6. Considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, and also taking into account the age and income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and applying the age factor of ‘215.28’ the Commissioner awarded compensation of Rs.2,15,280/-. 7. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that as per the admission of the owner of the vehicle, the deceased was drawing salary of Rs.3,000/- per month but the Commissioner has taken Rs.2,000/- per month only towards income of the deceased instead of Rs.3,000/- per month as was admitted by the owner of the vehicle and awarded the compensation. 8. Admittedly, no documentary evidence was produced to prove that the deceased was drawing salary of Rs.3,000/- per month by the date of accident. The Commissioner has taken the amount of Rs.2,000/- per month towards minimum wages of the deceased as per the W.C. Act and assessed the compensation by applying the relevant factor. The occupation and age of the deceased were not in dispute. The deceased being the driver of the tractor could be able to earn at least Rs.100/- per day in addition to the daily batta and Rs.2,000/- per month. The Commissioner ought to have taken into consideration the admission of the owner of the vehicle regarding the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month. Therefore, it is just and proper to assess the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and after applying the relevant age factor at ‘215.25’ the total compensation comes to Rs.3,22,875/- (Rs.3,000/- X 50/100 X 215.25), which is payable by the respondents jointly and severally. 9. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the order passed by the Commissioner is silent about the payment of interest. As per the W.C. Act and as per the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the appellants are entitled for interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the accident. 10. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellants relied on a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. MOHD. NASIR[1]. In the said case, the Commissioner awarded compensation with interest at the rate of 12 %per annum from the date of the accident till payment. 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in MOHD. NASIR’s case (supra) at paragraph 23 held as under: “The adjudication under Section 4 in some cases involves the assessment of loss of earning capacity by a qualified medical practitioner unless adjudication is done, question of compensation becoming due does not arise. The position becomes clearer on a reading of sub-section (2) of Section 4a. It provides that provisional payment to the extent of admitted liability has to be made when employer does not accept the liability for compensation to the extent claimed. The crucial expression is “falls due”. Significantly, legislature has not used the expression “from the date of accident.” Unless there is adjudication, the question of an amount falling due does not arise.” 12. Considering the provisions of Section 4a of the W.C. Act, the Hon’ble Supreme Court granted interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of filing of the application till the date of award and upheld the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal i.e., at 12% per annum from the date of award till payment. 13. Learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent contended that the appellants are entitled for interest only from the date of adjudication but not from the date of accident as there is no provision in the W.C. Act for payment of interest from the date of accident. Learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent-Insurer further contended that as per the provisions of Section 4 of the W.C. Act, the interest become payable w.e.f. one month after the date of adjudication by the Commissioner. Therefore, the claimants are not entitled for interest from the date of accident. 14. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in MOHD. NASIR’s case (supra), I am of the view that the appellants are entitled for interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of filing of the application till the date of order and thereafter, at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the order till payment. 15. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed in part enhancing the amount of compensation from Rs.2,15,280/- to Rs.3,22,875/- (Rupees three lakhs, twenty two thousand, eight hundred and seventy five only) with interest at the rate of 7 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the application till the date of order and thereafter at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of order till payment, in the circumstances, without costs. ___________________________ JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO 10th December, 2010. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2108 of 2003 10th December, 2010. [1] 2009 (4) Supreme 589