IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1670 2011 F Appeal Under Section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act against the order dated 07 ''12'20'lO in W'C' No' 57 of 2001 on the file of the Commissioner Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour at Nizamabad District. Between: ^asheer Occ: Cleaner of Lorry Bearing No ADB 4699 R/o' Cr,rik Gaffar, S/o Shatr ur iilEl].,i"ijri, aoonin wtaivtl, r\izamaoad District ...AppELLANr/cLAlMANr AND K:'lBlX[U,"*,;l"SX?l::'t8Hi*A3i't''%?il'"":K?#l'1#5:'17o"""'"n u,ix*st*,t:['flE,i.TBffi ]i['F:;'If; Bi'lT$?1'll';?;iR'J:i"sx' ...RESPONDENTS/ ( RESPONDENTS) Counsel for the Appellant: SRI AZAR SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for Respondent No' 2 : SRI NASARAIAH GOLLA Counsel for Respondent No' 1 : NONE APPEARED The Court delivered the following Judgment : 1 2 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM 7 I JUDGMENT Whatever may be the position pri Supreme Court in Orientat fnsurance finaliry was given in Siby Ceorg that compensation amount fa lls accident. This was in line with the Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas Si, This appeal is filed against the order dated 07.12.2010 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen,s Compensation, in W.C.No.57 of 2001 NF. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, and Sri Nasaraiah Golla, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurance company. The only question which has been pressed for consideration is with regard to the date of payment of interest. or to the jud9ment of Hon,ble Company v. Siby Georgel, e (1 supra) with respect to the issue due and payable as on the date of judgment <;f Supreme Court in pratap bata2. My learned brother Justice A. Rajasheker Reddy had elaborately considered all the judgments ciic(j by both the respondents in C.M./r.ro.87, , . ,'., :' "". . tne appellants as we as had held that the urru,,' n" 'ri 'l():5' and by order dated 04'12'2015 ant/clain-,ent is entitied to interest at l2o/o per annum from the date of accidcnt till the date of r though the amount of aorno.,",.,r-" . _ udre or realisation' However, riabirity to pay inreresr *':^::::t" is due on the date or accident, the rrrses oniy aiier one mon accident. This is on ua..,,,". ^. -^^,. "t" month from the date of compensation Act, 1923. rccourrt of section 4A(3) of the workmens '(2012) t2 scc 540 ( re76) I SCC 289 I t/ With respect to the contention of learned Standing Counsel for insurance company that the insurance company may not be mulcted with liability in cases where the appeal against the owner stood dismissed and the owner having not been made a party respondent, the said contention is liable to be rejected for the reason that the issue had already been dealt in c.M.A,No,B71 of 2015, dated 04.12.2015, by referring to the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Meka Chakra Rao v. Yelubandi Babu Rao @ Reddemma3. The iudgment of Division Bench being binding on this Court, and there being no reason for this Court to differ with the rationale in Meka Chakra, the contention of the learned Standing Counsel for insurance company is rejected. Accordingly, the civil miscellaneous appeal stands disposed of. It is made clear that wherever the compensation amount has been deposited in pursuance of the orders of Commissioner, the payment of interest shall be reckoned from one month after the date of accident till the date of deposit. No costs Miscellaneous applications, if any pendlng, shall also stand closed No costs. " 2001 (1) ALD 453 Sd/.B,S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REG TRAR //TRUE COPY' SECT ON OFFICER To 1. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation & Deputy Commissioner of Labour at Nizamabad. (with records) 2. One CC to SRl. AZAR SRAVAN KUMAR Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRl. NASARAIAH GOLLA, Advocate IOPUC] 4. Two CD Copies u\'\x I HIGH COURT CKRJ DATED:2410212021 JUDGMENT CMA.No.167 ot 2011 DISPOS1NG OF THE CMA WTIHOUT COSTS 12l.JlAR 2021 * * s74 , ( q\z' -dr'\Y c.' I H ,{