FA/71/1988 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 71 of 1988 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= CHANDRAKANT MANJIBHAI - Appellant(s) Versus FREEZEFAST CORPORATION - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR JD AJMERA for Appellant(s) : 1, (MR PB MAJMUDAR) for Defendant(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 15/05/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. By way of this appeal, original claimant has challenged the award passed by the learned Single Judge,(SD) and Ex-Officio Workman Compensation Commissioner, Baroda in Workman Compensation Case FA/71/1988 2/3 JUDGMENT No.48 of 1985 dated 4th October, 1986 whereby the learned Judge partly allowed claim by awarding a sum of Rs.5443/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 2. The original claimant was working with the opponent as mechanic. On 4.9.1983 an accident has occurred in which the claimant suffered injuries which resulted into permanent total disability. He therefore filed the aforesaid claim petition which was partly allowed. 3. The counsel for the appellant submitted that though a notice was given on 8th May, 1985 the employer was not making payment. Since the payment was not made within 30 days, the counsel for the appellant pressed for the penalty on the employer on the ground of delay in making the payment. Thus the only contention is with regard to penalty. 4. Heard Mr.J.D.Ajmera learned counsel for the appellant. 5. The accident has happened on 4th September, 1983 and the compensation was given after one year and six months. The competent authority has held that inspite of service of notice and the knowledge of the FA/71/1988 3/3 JUDGMENT accident the opponent has failed to pay or deposit the amount of compensation and therefore the applicant is entitled to get interest of 6% per annum. Accordingly interest has been paid. No case is made out to impose any penalty. Hence, appeal is devoid of merits and is dismissed. No order as to costs. (K.S.Jhaveri, J.) sudhir