IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2009 / 13TH MAGHA 1930 MFA.No. 72 of 2003(B) ------------------------------- WCC.74/2001 of WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION (DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER), ERNAKULAM . .................... APPELLANT(S): FIRST OPP.PARTY ----------------------------- HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD., ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, 24/1352, BRISTOW ROAD, WILLINGTON ISLAND, KOCHI - 3. BY MR.A.M.SHAFFIQUE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT.PRIYA KRISHNAMOORTHY MR.K.JOHN MATHAI RESPONDENT(S): APPLICANT AND OPP.PARTIES 2 AND 3 ---------------------------------- 1. P.K.ASHRAF, S/O.KOCHALI, PUTHUKKARA HOUSE, THENGODU P.O. KOCHI - 21. 2. M/S.KANDATHIL CONSTRUCTIONS, VAZHAKKALA, THRIKKAKKARA, COCHIN - 31. 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. BRANCH OFFICE, ISLAND. ADV. SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH FOR R3 R1 BY ADVS. MR. ANIL S.RAJ SMT.K.N.RAJANI MR.RADHIKA RAJASEKHARAN P. SMT.NITHYA.K. THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP. NO.339/2003 IN MFA. NO.72/2003 Dismissed 02.02.2009 SD/- K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE SD/- P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss C.R. K.Balakrishnan Nair & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ================================ M.F.A. No.72 of 2003 ===================== Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J. This is an appeal filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. The employer is the appellant. The first respondent was the applicant. The second respondent was the Sub Contractor, who engaged the applicant and the third respondent is the insurer. The first respondent while working under the second respondent, who was the Sub Contractor for the appellant, suffered certain injuries resulting in cent percent permanent disability. The first respondent moved the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner. The said authority awarded a compensation of Rs.2,39,380/- with 12% interest from 24.11.1999, the date of accident. The award was passed on 20.9.2002, with a direction to pay the amount within one month. The appellant challenges the said award on two grounds. The first ground is that the insurer is liable to pay the interest also. The second point is that the interest was liable to be awarded only from the date, the award became enforcible, that is, 30 days after 20.9.2002. 2. The first point raised by the appellant is covered against it by the decision of the Apex Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. MFA 72/03 -: 2 :- Harshadbhai Amrutbhai Modhiya and another - 2006 II L.L.J. 782. The second point raised by the appellant is covered against it by the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Sriniwas Sabata and another - 1976 I L.L.J. 235. The relevant portion of the said judgment reads as follows: “Section 3 of the Act deals with the employer's liability for compensation. Sub-section (1) of that section provides that the employer shall be liable to pay compensation if 'personal injury is caused to a workman by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.' It was not the case of the employer that the right to compensation was taken away under sub-s (5) of S.3 because of the institution of a suit in a civil Court for damages, in respect of the injury, against the employer or any other person. The employer, therefore, became liable to pay the compensation as soon as the aforesaid personal injury was caused to the workmen by the accident which admittedly arose out of and in the course of the employment. It is, therefore, futile to contend that the compensation did not fall due until after the Commissioner's order dated May 6, 1969 under S.19. What the section provides is that if any question arises in any proceeding under the Act as to the liability of any person to pay compensation or as to the amount of duration of the compensation it shall, in default of agreement, be settled by the Commissioner. There is, therefore, nothing to justify the argument that the employer's liability to pay compensation under S.3, in respect of the injury, was suspended until after the settlement contemplated by S.19. MFA 72/03 -: 3 :- The appellant was thus liable to pay compensation as soon as the aforesaid personal injury was caused to the appellant, and there is no justification for the argument to the contrary.” The learned counsel appearing for the appellant brought to our notice a recent decision of the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Mubasir Ahmed and another - 2008(1) L.L.N. 422, wherein it was held that interest is payable only from the date of the award. It is a decision rendered by a Bench of two Judges. The above apparent conflict between the two decisions of the Apex Court has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court in National Insurance Company Ltd v. Rekha - 2008 (1) L.L.N. 604 and held that this Court is bound by the decision of the Constitution Bench. We are in respectful agreement with the view expressed by the Division Bench of this Court in that case. So, the second contention of the appellant also cannot be accepted. In the result, the appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. K.Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 3/2