IN THE HlGH COURT OFGHHATriSGARH ATBILASPUR fC.G.V M.A. fClNQ. \\^ /2008 APPELLANTS 9- ^ ^•^•"'^swft,;vf^.--' ^.^&H^^^? !{«>"E"^ OA-V- .\ .^^ / '; , :1. Ratan Patel, S/o. Late Manglu Patel, aged about 60 years 2 Smt. Budhan Bai, W/o. Ratan Patel, aged about 55 years •&^-"'^ \ .. _ .'./...... ; _. ^.' T C^"^^^^ - Both R/o. Village Diwanbhedi, Post RESPONDENTS ^Pedawani, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS Smt. Dilprit Kaur, Sarabjit Singh, M.P. Bangal Roadwage, Juneza Complex, Ring Road No.2, Bhanpuri, Raipur (C.G.) Owner of Vehicle Truck- No.C.G.- 04-J-6235 ^-—' Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company, Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) CLAIM BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL : Rs.4,37,940/ AWARDAMOUNT : Rs.4,36,940/ VALULATION OF THE PRESENT APPEAL: Rs.2,00,000/ MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL U/S. 30 OF THE WORKMEN COMPENSATIONACT HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhe Shvam Sharma Miscellaneous Appeal (C.) No.1173 of 2008 Ratan Patel and another versus Smt. Dilprit Kaur and another ORDER Post for J^-07-2011 Sd/- R.S.Sharma Ju3ge t-iQ -•i®B3%^,^ .rc^ ^ . ^^^s^-^. S Sl 'S S \'^^/ 'fsaSS! HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR -'K'1 SingleBench: Hon'bleShriJusticeRadheShvam Sharma Miscellaneous Appeal (C.) No.1173 of 2008 Appellants Respondents versus Ratan Patel and another Smt. Dilprit Kaur and another Present: Shri Goutam Khetrapal, counselfortheappellants. Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, counsel for respondent No.2. None for respondent No.1. Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's ComDensation Act, 1923 ORDER (Passed on July,2011) The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 30 ofthe Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (henceforth 'the Act, 1923') by theappellants/claimants against the award dated 25-7-2008 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Labour Court, Rajnandgaon (henceforth 'the Connmissione^gg|in Case No.87/W.C./2006 (Fatal) insofar as it relates to non-awarding of interest and penaltyon the amount of compensation. 2. Facts of the case, innutshell, arethat theappellants/claimants are father and mother of deceased Ramlal. On 29-9-2006, Ramlal died while he was working asa driver ina truck bearing registration No.CG 04 J 6235, which was owned by respondent No.1 Smt. Dilprit Kaur. Ramlalwas an employee of respondent No.1. Ramlal died in the accident during the course of employment. The ^ '^^f'ff'''' .: <^ c appeliants/claimants, being legal heirs of deceased Ramlal, filed a claim petition before the Commissioner claiming compensation of Rs.4,37,940/- for the death of Ramlal in the accident. 3. In this appeal, as per first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the Act, 1923, following substantial question of law has been framed by this Court on 2-9-2008: "Whether the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Labour Couri:, Rajnandgaon erred in not awarding interest and penalty as contemplated by sub- clause (3) of Section 4 (A) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923?" 4. There is no dispute that an award of Rs.4,36,940/- has been passed by the Commissioner on 25-7-2008 and no interest and penalty have been awarded on the amount ofcompensation. 5. Shri Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the appellants has argued that provision ofclause (a) of sub-section (3) ofSection 4-A of the Act, 1923 is mandatory in nature, but the Commissioner did not award interest on the amount of compensation. The interest is payable from the date of filing of the claim petition, but'the Commissioner hasnot awarded any interest, which is violation of the provision of clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 4-A of the Act, 1923. Learned counsel placed reliance on Oriental Insurance CompanyLimited vs. Mohd. Nasir and another, (2009) 6 SCC 280, Kamla Chaturvedi vs. National Insurance Company and ^ others, (2009) 1 SCC 487 andNationallnsurance Co. Ltd. vs. Mubasir Ahmed and another, (2007) 2 SCC 349. 6. It is not disputed that theamount of compensation was not paid within the prescribed period of 30 days from the date of the accident, i.e., 29-9-2006. Clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 4- A of the Act, 1923 reads thus: \ "4-A. Compensation to be paid when due and penalty for default.— xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx (3) Where any employer is in default in paying the compensatioo due under this Act within one month from the date it fell due, the Commissioner shall- (a) direct that the employer shalt, in addition to the amount of the arrears, pay simple interest thereon at the rate of twelve per cent per annum or at such higher rate not exceeding the maximum of the lending rates of any scheduled bank as may be specified by the Central Government, bynotification in the Official Gazette, on the amount due;and" 7. The above provision appears to be mandatory in nature as the word "shall" has been used therein and as such the appellants/claimants are entitled to get simple interest @ 12% per annum on theamount ofcompensatipn, i.e., on Rs.4,36,940/-. 8. In National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Mubasir Ahmed and another (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held thus: "9. Interest is payable under Section 4-A(3) if there is default in paying the cofripensation due under this Act ••;. •t 1, '%XssSs^ l s^'' .^ '•!!i»,,^<rfi! withinone month fromthe date itfell due. The question of liability under Section 4-A was dealt with by this Court in Maghar Singh v. Jashwant Singh, (1998) 9 SCC 134. By amending Act 30 of 1995, Section 4-A of the Act was amended, inter alia, fixing theminimum rate of interest to be simple interest @ 12%. In the instant Case, the accident took place after the amendmentand, therefore, the rate of 12% as fixed by the High Courtcannot be faulted. ........" c. 9. In Kamla Chaturvedi vs. Natjonal Insurance Company and others (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held thus: "10. In National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mubasir Ahmed, (2007) 2 SCC 349, it was, inter alia, held as follows: (SCC pp. 354-55, para 9) "9. Interest is payable under Section 4-A(3) if there is default in paying the compensation due under this Act within one month from the date it fell due. The question of liability under Section 4-A was dealt with by this Court in Maghar Singh v. Jashwant Singh, (1998)9 SCC 134. By amending Act 30 of 1995, Section 4-A of the Act was amended, inter alia, fixing the minimum rate of interest to be simple interest @ 12%. In the instant case, the accident took place after the amendmentand, therefore, the rate of 12% as fixed by the High Court cannot be faulted. ........" 10. Applying the above principle,laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the instant case, it is evident that interest is payable on the amount of compensation from the date of filing of the claim petition, i.e., 13-12-2006. Hence,theappellants/claimantsare entitled to get simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 13- u ^^y :^...'."i¥'':..-^"' '''S"E!W'"?'' 0 12-2006 till reaiization of the amount of compensation of Rs.4,36,940/-. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. So far as awarding of interest is eoncerned, theappellants/claimants shall be entitled to getsimple interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the amountof compensation of Rs.4,36,940/-from 13-12-2006till thefinalpayment ofthe compensation is madeand respondent No.1 Smt. Dilprit Kaur and respondent No.2/insurance company shallbe liable jointly or severally for payment of the amountof compensation together with the interest awarded thereon within a period oftwo months from today. No order as to costs. Sd/- R-S.Sharma ie Gopal