FAO No.2889 of 2010 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** FAO No.2889 of 2010 Date of decision : 21.05.2010 ***** The New India Assurance Company Limited, Moga . . . . Appellant Versus Ramandeep Kaur and others . . . . Respondents ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.R.K. Bashamboo, Advocate for the appellant. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This appeal is directed against the order dated 21.1.2010 passed by Commissioner Amritsar under the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, by which the claimants/respondents No.1 to 3 have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.3,94,120/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of accident till 27.11.2009. In brief, claimants/respondents No.1 and 2 are the minor children of deceased Harjinder Singh, who have filed their claim petition through their grand-mother/claimant/respondent No.3. Harjinder Singh (since deceased) was employed as a truck driver on truck bearing No.PB-31E-0272 owned by Ajaib FAO No.2889 of 2010 - 2 - Singh/respondent No.4 on a monthly salary of Rs.5000/- along with Rs.2,000/- per month as overtime of long routes/diet money. Harjinder Singh was 35 years of age when he died. On 14.9.2007, while he was going from Muzaffer Nagar to Shamli on truck bearing No.PB-31E-0272 and had reached at bridge Tataviat about 12.10 PM, he had a collusion with Ashoka Leyland truck No.HR-55E- 7897 coming from the opposite side as a result of which Harjinder Singh (since deceased) suffered serious injuries. He was referred to Muzaffar Nagar Hospital where he breathed his last due to injuries. FIR was registered at Muzaffar Nagar and postmortem was also conducted there. Respondents No.4 and 5 were proceeded against ex parte but the claim petition was contested by the appellant. Since the truck was insured, therefore, in terms of insurance the appellant deposited a cheque of Rs.2,95,590/- towards its liability. However, the Commissioner assessed the compensation to the tune of Rs.3,94,120/- and directed the appellant to deposit the balance amount of Rs.98,530/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from 28.11.2009 i.e. from the date when amount of Rs.2,95,590/- was deposited by the appellant till the date of its realization and ordered that if the amount is not deposited within 30 days from the date of order, the interest shall be paid @ 18% per annum. In this appeal, the only argument raised by learned counsel for the appellant is that insurance company had not undertaken any liability to make payment of interest and if liability was there then from which date the said amount of interest was to be paid. It is further alleged that the Commissioner has erred in awarding interest @ 18%. FAO No.2889 of 2010 - 3 - I have heard learned counsel for the appellant in detail and have perused the record with his assistance. It is strange that on the one hand the appellant- insurance company has deposited a sum of Rs.2,95,590/- admitting its liability and on the other hand learned counsel for the appellant has argued that insurance company had no liability to make the payment. Nothing has been shown from the record that the insurance company had no liability to make the payment of interest. It has been rightly ordered by the Commissioner that the amount which was short at the time of initial deposit has been illegally retained by the appellant, therefore, they are liable to make payment of interest on the said amount and has further ordered that if the amount is not paid despite the order then they would be liable to pay interest @ 18% per annum. In view of the aforesaid, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. Thus, present appeal is found to be devoid of merit and as such the same is hereby dismissed though without any orders as to costs. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 21.05.2010 JUDGE Vivek