w C-t-^. IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MISC. APPEALfCt N0. ^ 4 OF 201° ylvlsio! MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTEON 30 OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATEON ACT. 1923 ADpellant Non-Applicant No. 2 ?1>-'^^ k^f.^--^ V- -\"f :.©^>- ^^' .^3» Respondents T 1. 2. National Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch No. 1, Bhutani Complex, 6.E. Road, Power House, Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (C©)through the Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. Taha Complex, Vyapar Vihar Road, Bilaspur (CG) Versys Smt. Shanti Bai, W/o Late Bhagirathi Lahare, aged 36 years, Smt. Phoolbai Lahare, W/o Late Bhoklu Lahare, aged 70 years, (Both R/o Ward No. 20, village Kugda, P.0. Urla, (BMY) P.S. Kumhari, Tahsil Patan, Distt. Durg (CG) Claimants/ADDlicants ^^ (Surdeep Singh, S/o Kesar Singh, R/o G.E. Road, Near Gurudwara, Charoda, Bhilai, Distt. Durg(CG) Non-ADDlicant no. 1 CLAIM IN APPEAL FOR SETTEN6 ASIDE THE_AWARD VALUEb ATRff" 3.32.580/- (RUPEES THREE LACS THIRT/ TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNbREb EI6HTy_ON^)___ _ •"^ HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR M.A. (C) No. 564 of 2010 Appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Respondents Smt. Shanti Bai & others APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 DB: Hon'ble Shri I. M. Quddusi S, " Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Agarwal, JJ Shri Qamrul Aziz, Advocatewith Sliri G. V. K. Rao, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Jitendra Gupta, Advocate for the respondent No. 3. None for the respondents No. 1 and 2 despite service ofnotice. ORDER (Oral) ( Passed on this 25U1 dayofNovember, 2010 ) Per I. M. Quddusi, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the National Insurance Company against the impugned award dated 26.3.2010, passed by the Cornmissioner for Workmen Compensation, Labour Court, Durg in Case No. 83/2008 W. C. Act (Fatal), awarding Rs. 3,32,580/- along with interest at the rate of 10% per annuin. 2.>. We have heard leamed counsel appearing for the parties, perused the lower Court record as well as the findings given. in the impugned award. 3. The brief facts, in nutshell, are that the respondents No. 1 (widow) and 2 (mother), had filed a claim case under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 on the ground that they were dependent on the deceased Bhagirathi, who died in an accident on 4.5.2008, while he was driving the vehicle C.G. 04-ZC/0129, 6. The widow of the deceased in her statement before the Commissioner Workmen Compensation stated that her husband was drawing Rs. 4000/- per months and Rs. 100/- per day allowance for personal expenses, though on a suggestion, made on behalf of the non-applicant, fhat her husband was getting only Rs, 3000/- as salary and for going out he was given personal expenses of Rs. 50/- per day, she denied that suggestion. However, she had stated that the age of her husband was 40 years at the time of accident. Learned Commissioner did not give any finding about the income of the deceased and only on the basis of the statement of the widow of the deceased the income of the deceased was assessed as Rs. 4000/- per month. Though, the age of the deceased, it appears, as stated by his widow, was not taken into consideration and the age was assessed as 46 years. Therefore, in our opinion it is a case of no evidence regarding the income of the deceased as there was no occasion for the Tribunal to not to pay attention on the statement of the employer. No reason has also been given for ignoring the statement of the employer and therefore this appeal involves a substantial question of law : Whether the Commissioner for Workmen Corapensation had erred in assessing the monthly incoine of the deceased as Rs. 4000/- per month, whereas the employer nanaely Gurdeep Singh deposed that the deceased was receiving Rs. 3000/- per raonth as salary ? 7. It is alsg to be noticed that the employer was not cross-examined by the claimants or other non-applicants on fhe point of monthly salary of the deceased. There was no suggestion from the side of the claimants that the monthly salary of the deceased was r '' .,y .y "^sy cs. Rs. 3000/- per month and it was Rs. 4000/- per month. Therefore, there was no occasion for the Cominissioner Workmen Coinpensation to ignore the stateraent of the einployer and give a perverse finding only on the basis of the statement of the widow of the deceased, who could not have a first hand information regarding the payment of salary. 8. In view of the above, the assessment of monthly salary of the deceased as Rs. 4000/- by the Cominissioner is perverse and is set-aside. We assess the monthly salaiy of the deceased as Rs. 3000/- per month. Considering the age of the deceased as 46 years the factor of 166.29 would be applicable and after deducting 50% of the wages, it comes to Rs. 1500/- per month. Therefore, by applying the factor 166.29, the amount of compensation comes to Rs. 2,49,435/-. 9 . Further, the Commissioner has also erred in awarding the interest at the rate of 10% per annum, as in Section 4-A of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 the minimum interest is given as 12% per annum from the date fhe afnount became due. 10. There is no evidence on record as to when the notice was served upon the employer and the amount became due and therefore, we are of the opinion that the claimants should be entitled to get the interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation. 11. - In view of the above, we allow this appeal in part, modify the impugned award dated 26.3.2010 and modify amount of compensation as well as the rate of interest and held that the claimants are entitled to get of Rs. 2,49,435/-. The amount of compensation would carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Commissioner till its payment. No order as to costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge Thalcur ^.ww^~~^'!,