41 V 0 FA0 No3612 of 2011 10 8 Mls IN THEHIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB 8 HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1 Date of Decisionl June 1 20110 1 0 FAO No3612 of 2011 1O Mle 0 I ICICI Lombard Insurance Company Appellant 0 Versus Z of JKMa Infrastructure Specialist Ill Ready Mix ConcreteSonepat and others I Z CORAM HONBLEMRJSTICE MOHINDER PAL 00 le Whether of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment 2 m 2 To be referredto the Reportersor not 7 Z 3 Whether the should be reportedin the Digest7 Presentl Mr MB Jain Advocate for the appellant MOHINDER PAL Je The ICICI Lombard Insurance Company lereinafter referred to as the Insurance Company has preferred this againstthe orderl award dated 6102010 passed by the Commissioner underWorkmens Compensation Act 1923 Circle 2 Sonepat hereinafter referred to as the Commissionerl Batra Amit 2013.04.26 10: 46 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 42 0 e FA0e Non3612 of 2011 O S Ml the Nos 3 and 4 herein parents of deceasedArvind who was admittedlyworking as TM Helperwith respondentNol at Sonepat having its head office at Delhi ie respondentNoe2 were held entitled to m the to the tune of RsA104281e along with interest 0 at the rate of 12 per cent per annum frornthe date of filingof 40 the ciaim taking the salaryof the deceasedvorkman as C5 Rs66454 per month ie minimum wages as applicable to the 32 categoryofthe deceased Z Arvind deceased aged about 20 YearS son of was admittedlyworkingas T Helperwith C No Nos 1 and 2 admitted that I the workmanat the time of accident Ieadlngto his death was Z working on the vehicle mixture bearingNoHR550090 00 whichwas insured with the Insurance Company In view of the admitted position that the deceaset workman was an of respondentNo 1 and 2 and died the course of employmentwhile giving dutY at VehiCle mixture NoeHR550090 which was insured with the company I do not see any ground Warrantin interference in the award so far as award Of to the dependents of the workman is concerned as the amount of compensationIea RsA10A281 is not at all on the excessiveside It has been held by the Honble SupremeCourt in the of Ved Prakash Garq Vs Premi Devi and Others 19971 case Batra Amit 2013.04.26 10: 46 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 43 0 e3 FeAeOeNoe3612 of 2011 t0 8 Mle 8 SCC that the Insurance Company will not only be Iiable to paythe principalamount of but also interest thereon if any imposedby the Commissioner As noticed above in this case the Commissioner ordered payment of interest to the m l at the rate of 12 per cent per annum 0 from the date of filingof the claim petition Instead of 12 per cent 0 per annum the will be entitled to interest 0 at the rate of 9 per cent per annume However the claimants will be entitled to receive further interest at the Z rate of 9 per cent per annum from 6112010 ie after one month of the awardwhich was given on 6102010 in case the Insurance failed to make paymentof the amount of I within one month of the passingof the award The 0 Z award is modified to the extent as indicated above m This appealstands disposedof accordingly 0 Z MOHINDER PAl June I 2011 JUDGE 1 ak S 1 9 Batra Amit 2013.04.26 10: 46 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document