: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.2371 OF 2005 Husain Abdul Kadir Khatib .. Appellant Versus The Shipping Corporation of India .. Respondents Mr. A.N. Mulla for the Appellant. Mr. Tariq Baig a/w. Mr. S. Desa for the Respondents. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED : 10 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. The First Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation in Application (WCA) No.723/C-216/2001. The appellant was employed as a “Dock Sarang” by the respondents herein on their ship “M.T. Jogendra Singh”. He sustained injuries due to an accident arising out of and during the course of his employment with the respondents. The injury resulted into Osteoarthritis and a knee replacement surgery which he claimed rendered him totally and permanently disabled. He, therefore, : 2 : filed an application before the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and sought compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act as well as under the National Maritime Board Agreement under which the appellant claimed that he was entitled to Rs.12 lacs. 2. The application was allowed by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation to the extent of the amount payable under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Thus, the respondents were directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,62,672/- jointly and severally towards compensation. They were further directed to pay interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of the accident till realization of the amount and further an amount of 50% of the compensation awarded as penalty. The prayer made by the appellant for compensation of Rs.12 lacs under the National Maritime Board Agreement was rejected by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation by concluding that he had no jurisdiction to decide such a claim. : 3 : 3. The First Appeal challenges that part of the decision of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation which rejects the claim under the National Maritime Board Agreement. 4. This issue is no longer res-integra. In the case of B.T. Shipping London Ltd. & Anr. vs. Smt. Arati Narayanan & Ors., reported in 2000 (2) ALL MR 86, a learned Single Judge of this court [Lodha, J. as he then was] has held that the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation can grant compensation which is payable under the Act alone and not any higher compensation which may be payable under the agreement. It has been held that Section 19(2) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act does not disbar the deceased employee’s dependents to initiate proceedings in the Civil Court for enforcing the clause in the service conditions with regard to the compensation. 5. In my view, therefore, the First Appeal must be dismissed. In the event the appellant wants to agitate his claim for compensation under the : 4 : National Maritime Board Agreement, it is open for him to do so in accordance with law. 6. The First Appeal is dismissed. .......