48 0 r FeAeOeNoa2334 of 2010 10 8 Mle IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB 8 HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH eee 1 Date of Decision2 June 1 1 2011 0 FAOlloe2334 of 2010 t0 8 Mle 0 I The Oriental Insurance Company Limited C5 I Versus Z Jasbir Kaur and another eeaaenaeDefendantse I CORAM HONBLE MRJUSTICE MOHINDER PAL Z 1 Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see 0 the j udgment7 2a To be referred to the Reportersor not7 3 Whether the judgmentshould be reported ill the Digest7 m Z Present Mr ReK Bashamboo Advocate for the appeliant MrBSittal Advocate for respondentNo MrOaswant Jain Advocate for respondentNo MOHINDER PAL Je The Oriental Insurance Company Limited lereinafter referred to as the Insurance Companl has preferred this appeal againstthe orderl award dated 1622010 passed by Anita 2013.04.25 14: 49 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 49 Ot e FAOe Noe2334 of 2010 l0 S Mle the Commissioner under Workmens CompensationAct 1923 hereinafter referred to as the Commissioner whereby Jasbir Kaur respondent No l wife of JoginderSingh deceased workman who had been employed by respondent No2was l held entitled to the compensation to the tune of Rs3388801 0 taking the salary of the deceasecvorkman as Rs 66001 per 0 I month 0 JoginderSingh deceased workmanl had been working I with respondentNo2 Iee Mls ManojCotton a General Mills on the Z SaggingMachine inthe factory premises of respondentNo2 As a result of sudden eruptionof fire in the cotton on 2322009 JoginderSingh received severe burn injuries Ieadingto his death I C on 2522009 The deceased workman had been insured through Z a GroupInsurance Policy of the Insurance Company 10 The Commissioner had also imposedpenaltyupon the 7 InsuranceCompany to the tune of Rs84720lesides awarding Z interest at the rate of 9 per cent on the amount of compensation 11 from the date of the application ie 243e2009 till the date of actual paymente In view of the admitted positlon that the deceasec workman was an employeeof respondent No2 and he deceased workmai had been insured through a Group Insurance Policy of the Insurance Company I do not see any ground interference in the impugnedaward so far as award of to the workman is concerned as the amount of compensation ies Rs3388801 is not at ail on the excessive side Anita 2013.04.25 14: 49 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SO Ol 3 FeAOe No334 of 2010 l0 S Mle It has been held by the Honble SupremeCourt in the case of Ved Prakash Garg Vse Premi Devi and Others1997 8 SCC that the Insurance Company will not only be Iiable to paythe principalamount of compensationbut also interest thereon 1C if any imposed by the Commissioner But the Insurance Company will not be liable to reimburse the additional amount 0 0 of compensation by way of penaltyimposedby the Commissioner I C5 As noticed above in this case the Commissioner ordered the interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of Z application tili the date of realization of the amount of to be paid to respondentNo l In view of the above the Insurance Companywill not I be Iiable to pay the amount of penalty as imposed by the t Z Commissioner and respondentNo l will be entitled to receive further interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from C 1632010 iee after one month of the award which was given on 7 Z 1622010 in case the amount of compensation had not been 11 within one month of the passingof the awa rd by the Commissioner The impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated above This appealstands disposedof accordingly MOHINDER PALI June 1 2011 JUDGE 1 ak 4 Il Il t1 9 Anita 2013.04.25 14: 49 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document