IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2010 / 22TH POUSHA 1931 MFA.No.(WCC) 239 of 2009() --------------------- WCC.51/2002 of WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION AND DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND OPPOSITE PARTY IN WCC.51/02: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- M/S.UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., ALAPPUZHA BRANCH REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL MANAGER, HOSPITAL ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. MR.M.A.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): APPLICANT AND 1ST OPPOSITE PARTY IN WCC.51/02: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. SRI.CHELLAPPAN, S/O.CHELLAYYANADAR, SHALLAICARA ESTATE, SHALLAICARA PO. 2. THE MANAGER, RAJAGIRI RUBBER PRODUCING COMPANY, SHALLAICARA ESTATE, SHALLAICARA PO. R1 BY ADVS. MR.THOMAS ABRAHAM, MR.DIPU.R. SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW. R2 BY ADVS.MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, MR.K.JOHN MATHAI, MR.P.BENNY THOMAS, MR.P.GOPINATH. THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.F.A.No.239 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Kollam in W.C.C.No.51/2002. The only question that arises for determination is whether interest is liable to be paid from the date of the accident or only from the date of the award. 2. The learned counsel for the insurance company would contend that interest need be paid only from the date of award for the reason that the amount is crystalised only on passing of the award. In Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Shrinivas Sabata (AIR 1976 222), a Constitutional Bench decision, the Hon'ble Apex Court found that interest is to be paid from the date of the accident. Later a Division Bench of this Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rekha (2007 (4) KLT 386) considered the impact of the Constitutional Bench decision and later decision of the apex court. This Court held that when there is conflict between the decisions : 2 : M.F.A.No.239 OF 2009 of the Supreme Court, the decision of the Larger Bench will prevail. So analysing the case in the backdrop of the Constitutional Bench decision, this Court held that the liability to pay interest is from the date of the accident and not later. Considering the Constitutional Bench decision as well as the decision of the Division Bench of this Court, a learned Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in the decision reported in New India Assurance Company v. Budh Ram (2009 (4) TAC 614) had quoted it as follows: “The Constitution Bench had already decided the question as to when compensation falls due in terms of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. Unfortunately, this decision of the Constitution Bench was not brought to the notice of the Apex Court while deciding National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Mubasir Ahmed and Another, 2007 A.C.J. 845: 2007 (2) T.A.C 3. Therefore, I feel that this Court is bound by the judgment rendered by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court and I accordingly hold that the compensation falls due on the date when the accident takes place and in case the same is not deposited within thirty days, the workman is entitled to claim interest at the rate of 12% per annum without having to show that delay in depositing the compensation was attributable to the employer. While taking this view, I am supported by a Division Bench judgment of the Kerala High Court reported in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Rekha, 2008 A.C.J : 3 : M.F.A.No.239 OF 2009 886” So, in the light of the decisions referred to above, this Court cannot find fault with the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner having awarded interest from the date of the accident. Therefore the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 :