IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3730 of 2004 Date of decision: 13.07.2010 New India Assurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Smt. Rajwanti and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. The point of law urged in the appeal by the Insurance Company is whether the insured will be liable for payment of interest fro the date of accident till payment. 2. The issue is not any longer res integra in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ved Parkash Garg Versus Premi Devi and others-(1997) 8 SCC 1. The claim of interest has been denied in yet another case (National Insurance Company Limited Versus Mubasir Ahmed and another (2007) 2 SCC 349) by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case where an amount was required to be determined by suitable evidence for an injury arising out of employment. In my FAO No.3730 of 2004 - 2 - view, there is a distinction between the liability which is determined for the first time on appraisal of evidence which is contentious and the liability that is non-contentious for the quantum as regards the death of a workman. The liability there arises on the employer on the date of the accident and the non-satisfaction of the claim for more than 2 years was justification enough for a Commissioner to award interest. The provision for payment of interest is prescribed under Section 4(A) of Workmen's Compensation Act. Section 4(A)(2) states that where an employer does not accept liability for compensation, he shall be bound to make a provisional payment to the extent to which he accepts. Clause (3) states that where the employer is in default in paying the compensation due under the Act within one month from the date it fell due, the employer shall in addition to the amount of arrears pay simple interest. The question as to when 'it fells due' would depend whether the liability is admitted by the employer or not. Where there is no denial of such a liability if the amount is not paid on the date when accident takes place, there attaches a liability to pay interest as well. Situations could be different where the employer denies the employment status and forces an adjudication. It could again be a case of a denial of death or injury arising out of or in the course of employment. That would also require an adjudication. If a driver driving the vehicle, who is a workman dies while admittedly on duty and the employer knows about it, the non- payment ought to be taken as contumacious and the date of liability when it falls due must be taken as the date when the accident takes place and when the death results. The liability for payment of interest was clearly FAO No.3730 of 2004 - 3 - established in this case and the question of law is answered against the appellant affirming the award of the Commissioner. 3. The appeal is consequently dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 13.07.2010 sanjeev