Source: http://workmenscompensationact1923.blogspot.com/p/v-penalty.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 21:45:39+00:00

Document:
• If an employer fails to deposit compensation as required under Act, he will be liable for payment of penalty.
Dalip Kaur v. General Manager, Northern Railway, (1992) 1 LLJ 762: 1990 LLR 581 (P&H HC).
• In case an employer fails to deposit compensation, the Commissioner can impose penalty to the extent of 50% besides interest on the late payment. The insurer cannot be held liable for the negligence of the employer.
'ayantilal & Company Rajkot v. Garasin Rajvirba Udesinh, 1992 LIC 1255: (1991) 2 CLR 424: 1991 LLR 630: 1991 (63) FLR 709 (Guj He).
• Imposition of penalty for late deposit of compensation will be justified.
Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Indira Devi, 1995 LLR 984: 1995(71) FLR 369 (Raj He). • Penalty for late deposit of compensation will not be set aside on the plea that the workman failed to submit medical certificate.
Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board v. Mohd. Hasan, (1998) III LLj (Supp) 1292: 1996 LLR 1113 (MP HC).
• Imposition of penalty and interest alongwith compensation for accident without giving reasons will not be sustainable.
1.	Mohanlal Khandelwal v. Shantabai, (1997) 1 LLN 351: (1996) 1 KLT 598: 1996 LLR 870 (MP He).
2.	S. Kumaraswamy v. Ramu, (2001) 90 FCR 362: (2002) 2 Kant Lj 318: (2001) 4 LLN 1230: 2000 LLR 805 (Kam HC).
• Penalty for late payment of compensation without affording opportunity to an employer will not be justified.
Diamond Cements Caasingarh v. Pravin Bano, 1996 LLR 1097 (MP He).
• Insurance company can also be saddled with penalty for delay in making the payment of compensation under W.e. Act.
New India Assurance Company v. Tarubai, 1997 LLR 424 (MP He).
• Penalty by the Commissioner under the Act for late payment of compensation by a public sector undertaking will not be justified when the delay is not wilful.
Bank Note Press, Dewas v. Shri Umaro Singh, (1997) 2 LLN 882: (1997) 76 FLR 560: (1998) 2 LLl 23: 1997 LLR 422 (MP He).
• Liabillty to pay compensation under the Act is no fault liability and the amount to be paid is given in the table under section 4, also on non-payment, the employer would be liable for penalty and interest from date of accident or at the latestly by one month thereafter.
Shivaji Krishna Gaikwad v. Telecom District Engineer, Sangli, 1997 LIC 125: (1996) 3 LLN 674: (1997) 1 CLR 70: (1996) 2 Mah LJ 874: 1997-II LLJ 1155 (Born HC).
• To levy penalty on owner, when Insurance Company is saddled with responsibility of making payment, is not justified. Only one who pays (or is to pay) compensation beyond saddled with responsibility of paying interest proportionately.
Iayamma (Smt) v. Munihishnappa c., 1998 LIC 2321: (1998) 1 CLR 1146: (1998) 92 FjR 731: 1998 II LLJ 523 (Karn He).
• An insurance company cannot be saddied with penalty for default of the employer.
National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Maya DeDi, 1999 LLR 222 (P&H He): 1999-1 CLR 819. • Liability about penalty for late payment of compensation is upon the owner and not the insurance company.
Bisesar Sio Dasaru v. Govind Oil Mill, 2001 Lill 130 (MP He).
• Imposing penalty in default for payment of compensation, the Commissioner must give show cause notice to the employer.
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Sri Chhtelal Milhato, (2003) 1 LLl 102: 2002 LLR 1193 (]har He).
• Imposition of penalty for late deposit of compensation will be set aside when the workman had not made such claim and the Compensation Commissioner had not given opportunity to the employer before imposing the penalty.
Shri Ram Dal Mills v. Rama slo Setu, 2003 LLR 486 (MP He).
• When the employer fails to deposit the amount of compensation with the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, the Insurance Company cannot be held liable to pay penalty for delayed payment.
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Bimla Devi, 2004 LLR 12: 2003 (99) FLR 550 (Del He). • Imposition of penalty for delayed payment of compensation, merely because. the owner of the vehicle was a lawyer, will not be justified.
Umesh Veerabhadrappa Milolima"ni v. Vijay Shivanand Tubachi, 2005 LLR 895 (Karn He). • Even when an employer is proceeded ex-parte in the compensation recovery proceedings before the Compensation Commissioner, the imposition of penalty requires a fresh notice.
New India Assurance Company v. Milya DeDi, 2006 LLR 164 (HP He).
• An employer, not the insurer can be saddled with the penalty for delayed payment of compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
National Insurance Company v. Oulal Debnath, 2006 LLR 123 (Gau HC).
• Penalty for delayed payment of accident compensation without show-cause to the employer is not legal.
Kamal Kumar v. Swarnkaur, 2008 LLR 869 (MP He).
• A Commissioner under Workmen's Compensa lion Act can refuse to register a settlement except only after recording reasons.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Tezpur, 2007 LLR 1230 (SN) (Gau HC).
• Compensation Commissioner can enhance the compensation than claimed ..
New Indm Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Daya Ram, 2007 LLR 1152 (All HC).
• High Court will not interfere when the Compensation Commissioner declines to summon a particular witness.
Mis Vaibhav Castings (P) Ltd. v. Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Kanpur, 2008 LLR 1007 (SN) (All HC).
MIs. Ruby International Annapurna Metal, Peetal Basti, Moradabad v. Devendra Singh, 2009 LLR 107 (SN) (All HC).
• The powers of the Commissioner lUlder section 19 of the Workmen's Compensation Act is not confined only against the employer and it extends to the liability on any person to pay compensation.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. by its Divisional Manager, Madurai v. G. Elango @ Sundararajan, 2009 LLJ 181 (Mad HC).
• If an employer fails to deposit compensation as required lUlder Act, he will be liable for payment of penalty.
'ayantilal & Company Rajkot v. Garasia Rajvirba Udesinh, 1992 LIC 1255: (1991) 2 CLR 424: 1991 LLR 630: 1991 (63) FLR 709 (Guj HC).
Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Indira Devi, 1995 LLR 984: 1995(71) FLR 369 (Raj HC). • Penalty for late deposit of compensation will not be set aside on the plea that the workman failed to submit medical certificate.
Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board v. Mohd. Hasan, (1998) III LLj (Supp) 1292: 1996 LLR. 1113 (MP HC).
1.	Mohanlal Khandelwal v. Shantabai, (1997) 1 LLN 351: (1996) 1 KLT 598: 1996 LLR 870 (MP HC).
2.	S. Kumaraswamy v. Ramu, (2001) 90 feR 362: (2002) 2 Kant LJ 318: (2001) 4 LLN 1230: 2000 LLR 805 (Kam HC).
Diamond Cements Caasingarh v. Pravin BanD, 1996 LLR 1097 (MP He).
• Insurance company can also be saddled with penalty for delay in making the payment of compensation lUlder W.e. Act.
New India Assurance Company v. Tarubai, 1997 LLR 424 (MP HC).
Bank Note Press, Dewas v. Shri Umaro Singh, (1997) 2 LLN 882: (1997) 76 FLR 560: (1998) 2 LLj 23: 1997 LLR 422 (MP HC).
• Liability to pay compensation under the Act is no fault liability and the amount to be paid is given in the table under section 4, also on non-payment, the employer would be liable for penalty and interest from date of accident or at the latestly by one month thereafter.
Shivaji Krishna Gaikwad v. Telecom District Engineer, Sangli, 1997 L1C 125: (1996) 3 LLN 674: (1997) 1 CLR 70: (1996) 2 Mah Lj 874: 1997-11 LLj 1155 (Born HC).
Jayamma (Smt) v. Munikrishnappa c., 1998 L1C 2321: (1998) 1 CLR 1146: (1998) 92 FjR 731: 1998 11 LLj 523 (Kam HC).
National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Moya Devi, 1999 LLR 222 (P&H HC): 1999-1 CLR 819. • Liability about penalty for late payment of compensation is upon the owner and not the insurance company.
Bisesar S/o Dasaru v. Govind Oil Mill, 2001 LLR 130 (MP HC).
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Sri Chhtelal Mohato, (2003) 1 LLj 102: 2002 LLR 1193 ()har HC).
Shri Ram Dal Mills v. Rama s/o Setu, 2003 LLR 486 (MP HC).
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Bimla Devi, 2004 LLR 12: 2003 (99) FLR 550 (Del HC). • Imposition of penalty for delayed payment of compensation, merely beca~e the owner of the vehicle was a lawyer, will not be justified.
Umesh Veerabhadrappa Moolimani v. Vijay Shivanand Tubachi, 2005 LLR 895 (Kam HC). • Even when an employer is proceeded ex-parte in the compensation recovery proceedings before the Compensation Commissioner, the imposition of penalty requires a fresh notice.
New India Assurance Company v. Maya Devi, 2006 LLR 164 (HP HC).
National Insurance Company v. Dulal Debnath, 2006 LLR 123 (Gau HC).
• Penalty for delayed payment of accident compensation without show-eause to the employer is not legal.
Kamal Kumar v. Swarnkaur, 2008 LLR 869 (MP HC).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.