40 r 4 F1eOe No 3648 of 2011 O S PO IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB S HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH eee 1 Date of Decision Oune 2011 0 1 0 FeAeOIloe3648 of 2011 10 8 Mls 0 I Oriental Insurance Company Limited SSeeeAppellant C5 e4 I Versus Z Balbir Singh and another SeeeRespondents e2 f I CORAM HONBLE MRJSTICE MOHINDER PAL Z m 1 Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment7 2 To be referred to the Reporters or not7 3e Whether the judgmentshould be reported in the Digest 7 Presentl Mr DPe GuptaAdvocate for the appellant MOHINDER PAL J Orientai Insurance Company Limited hereinafter referred to as the Insurance Company has preferred this appeal againstthe orderl award dated 1622011 passed by the Commissioner under Workmens CompensationAct 1923 Circle Parkash Om 2013.01.16 12: 16 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 41 e FaAnOaNoe3648 of 2011 l0 8 Mle Kurukshetra hereinafter referred to as the Commlsslonerl whereby respondentNo lworkman Balbir Singh who was in the employmentof respondent No3 as DrivercummCleaner on 1 Canter bearingregistration NoHR4517425 and had suNered r injuriesincluding fracture on his right Ieg Ieadingto the 0 amputationof the rightIeg Ill the employment of respondentNoe3 0 I was held entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs2444461 9 along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filingof the claim petition 1e 62007 to the Z date of the award ie 1622011 It was further ordered by 0 the Commissioner that if the Insurance Company failed to deposit the amount of compensation alongwith interest at the I rate of 12 per cent per annum within thirty days ofthe Z passingof the award the Insurance Company would be Iiable to m pay interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum on the aforesald amount of compensation only from the date of the order till its realization The Commissioner also imposed penalty upon respondentNo3 to the extent of 50010 of compensatlon1ee Rsl222231 As per case initially set up by the workmanm respondent Noelhe was employedwith respondentNo 2 as a DriverecumCleaner on his Canter bearingregistration No HR 4517425 on a monthlysalaryof RsA000 plusRs1001 per day as pocket allowance on travelling The workman received grievous inluries in the course of employment with respondent No2 On 10 102006 after unloadingthe luggagefrom the said Canter Parkash Om 2013.01.16 12: 16 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 42 1 r1 r 8e FaAe0 Noe3648 of 2011 l0 S Mla atPanchkula the workman and respondentNo2 owner of the Canter were coming back towards their Village Bastaraa At that time the Canter was beingdriven by respondentNo2 in a rash and negligentmanner and struck against the standing Tralla 1 Q As a result of the accident the workman suffered Injuries The 0 workmanwas taken to LNP Hospital at Kurukshetra where he 0 was medicoIegallyexamined Since the condition of the workman I C5 was serious he was referred to PGl where he was operated on 1I 11102006 Thereafter the workman remained under treatment at Z General Hospital Karnal upto 3122006 FR with regardto 2 said accident had been registeredagainst respondentNo 2 The 0 workman had suffered 70 per cent disability as finally his right I leg had to be amputatede Z Later on Balbir Singh respondentNo3 in this case m was got impleaded as a party to the ciaim petition by the 7T workman In the written statement filed by Balbir Singh Z respondent No 31 he admitted that the workman was in his ll employment and he used to pay Rs3500 per month to the workman However Balbir Singh espondent No denied the factum of accident After takinginto account the entire evidence Ied by the parties the Commissioner gave a firm finding that the workman was workingas a Conductor on Canter bearingregistration NoHR4517425 owned by respondentNo3 and he workmanl had received injury on 10 102006 as Conductors side of the Canter got hit with the standing Tralia and rightIegof the Parkash Om 2013.01.16 12: 16 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 43 m4e FeAeOeNoe3648 of 2011 lO a Mla workman entangled in the Canter resulting in fracture Taking into account the disability and sufferingsof the No l as his rightIeghad to be amputatedthe Commissionerhad awarded the aforesaid amount of compensation f ie Rs2444461 along with interest Since the employer 0 respondent NO had taken Insur8nce Policy from the 0 I Insurance Companymappellantit appellantlwas held Iiable to pay t5 the compensation amount of Rs444461 along with interesta However the amount of penaity of Rs1222231 was ordered to Z be paid by the owner ie respondent No The amount of compensation can in no way be said to be on the higherside 0 It has been held by the Honble Supreme Court in the I 0 caseof Ved Prakash Garq Vs3remi Devl and Othersr C19971 Z 8 SCC that the Insurance Company will not only be Iiable to C pay the principalamount of compensation but also interest thereon 7B if any imposedby the Commissioner But the Insurance Company will not be Iiable to reimburse the additional amount of compensationby way of penalty imposed by the Commissloner As noticed above in this case the Commissioner ordered payment of interest to the workmarrespondentNoel at the rate of 12 per cent from the date of filingof the clalm petition to the date of passing of the award and at the rate of 12 per cent per annum on the a mou nt of compensation if the amount of com pensation was not depositedwithin one month from the date of passingof the award However the No l will be entitled to receive interest at the rate of 9 per cent per Parkash Om 2013.01.16 12: 16 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 44 1 e5 FnAeOeNon3648 of 2011 l0 8 M1e annum from the date of fiiing of the clalm petitlon till the date of passing of the award and further interest at the same rate from 16 3 2011 ie after one month of the award which was given Oll 162201 1 on the amount of compensatlononly In case the 1 amount of compensation iee Rs244446 alongwith interest has 0 not been depositedwithin one month of the passingof the award 0 I As noticed above in the case of Ved Prakash Garq C5 supral the Honble SupremeCourt has held that the Insurance Companywill not be Iiable to reimburse the additionai amount of compensation by way of penalty Since the Insurance Company has been absolved of the Iiabilityof penalty by the Honble 0 SupremeCourt the same cannot be fastened on the owner of the I Cl vehicle Therefore respondentNo3 Nner will not be Iiable to Z pay the penalty amount of Rs1222231 as ordered by the m Commissioner The impugned award is modified to the extent eem as indicated above Z This appealstands disposedof accordingly Q 9 2 e PALI June 1 2011 JUDGE 1 ak 1 1 ll 1 I6 Il bl IJ Parkash Om 2013.01.16 12: 16 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document