FA/3421/2006 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 3421 of 2006 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15103 of 2007 In FIRST APPEAL No. 3421 of 2006 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? -Yes. 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? -No. 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? -No. 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? -No. 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? -No. ========================================================= GUJARAT STATE RURAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. - Appellant(s) Versus MRS. MANJULABEN PREMJIBHAI PARMAR - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR HS MUNSHAW for Appellant(s) : 1, None for Defendant(s) : 1, MR KIRTIDEV R DAVE for Defendant(s) : 1.2.1, 1.2.2,1.2.3 MR RAHUL K DAVE for Defendant(s) : 1.2.1, 1.2.2,1.2.3 ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 29/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT FA/3421/2006 2/3 JUDGMENT 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant-original respondent has challenged the judgment and order dated 17/2/2004 passed by the Labour Court and Ex-officio of Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Surendranagar in Workman Compensation (Fatal) Case No.12 of 92 whereby the learned Commissioner has partly allowed the case of applicants and awarded compensation in the sum of of Rs.77,856/- and also awarded penalty of Rs.22,114/- with interest at the rate of six percent. 2. Brief facts of the case are that applicants are the legal heirs and representatives of deceased Premjibhai Gordhanbhai Parmar. Premjibhai Gordhabhai Parmar was working with the defendant as Project Assistant and earned salary of Rs.1,470/-. Premjibhai has died on 29/11/1990 during the course of employment and therefore, his legal heirs filed the present compensation case for recovery of compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the death of Premjibhai Parmar which came to be partly allowed. 3. Heard learned advocate Mr.H.S.Munsha for the appellant. He has contended that the workman has never given notice and has straight away approached to the Workmen Compensation Authority. According to him, the accident has happened on 29/11/1990 and thereafter, application was filed after long period of more than one year and therefore, the penalty imposed FA/3421/2006 3/3 JUDGMENT by the Workmen Compensation Authority is disproportionate and the amount awarded is also disproportionate. 4. I have considered the reasonings given by the Workmen Compensation Authority. The factum of employment is not in dispute. The appellant has not produced any evidence to show that the employee was on leave on the day of the incident. The authority has found that during the supervision work on 29/11/1990 at the ager of 36 years, employee has met with an accident. There is nothing on record to revers this finding of the authority. Even the compensation awarded is just and proper. Even after his death, the the appellant has not paid compensation. Therefore, I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given and the findings arrived at by the Trial Court. No case is made out to interfere with the matter. 5. In the premises, First Appeal deserves to be dismissed. Hence, the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. 6. As the First Appeal is dismissed, Civil Application would not survive. Hence, the same is disposed of accordingly. (K.S.Jhaveri, J.) (ila)