Veenaben Ganpatbahi Patel vs Rajubhai Natubhai Kanejia

     C/FA/2462/2019                                         ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                         R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2462 of 2019
================================================================
                          VEENABEN GANPATBAHI PATEL
                                     Versus
                           RAJUBHAI NATUBHAI KANEJIA
===============================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA(1974) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
===============================================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

                                  Date : 22/02/2023
                                   ORAL ORDER

1. The present First Appeal is filed by the appellants against the judgment and order dated 16.09.2017 by the Commissioner under the Workmens' Compensation Act passed in Workmen Compensation (Fatal) No.28 of 2010. By an order dated 14.06.2019 notice was issued for final disposal. Today, when the matter is taken up, learned advocate Mr. Pravin Gondaliya appearing for respondent No.1 has filed a sick note today however, both the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties have submitted that the respondent No.1 is a formal patty in view of the claim of the appellants only restricted to the interest awarded by the Compensation Commissioner.

2. The facts of the case would indicate that the claimants are dependents of the deceased employee of respondent No.1 which was engaged in the business of transportation and the deceased employee was working as a Cleaner.

3. There appears to be an accident which took place on 24.06.2010 which resulted into death of the deceased employee Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 24 20:44:46 IST 2023 C/FA/2462/2019 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 Ganpatbhai Ramabhai Patel. In this connection, an FIR was also registered and appellants herein being the dependents had registered their claim under the provisions of Workmens' Compensation Act.

4. Learned advocate for the appellants took this Court to the impugned judgment and order of the Compensation Commissioner and submitted that the Compensation Commissioner was satisfied with regard to the accident which took place and the entitlement of the claimants to dependency benefits and had accordingly, ordered the compensation of Rs.4,59,270/-. However, while awarding the compensation, the interest awarded is to the extent of 6% which is not in consonance with the statutory provision which provides for interest at the rate of 12%.

5. Learned advocate Mr. Rathin Raval appearing for the respondent No.2-Insurance Company has justified the order of the Compensation Commissioner and has submitted that no interference is required.

6. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the question that needs to be considered now is whether the interest of 6% awarded by the Compensation Commissioner is in consonance with the statutory provisions. For this reason, it would be appropriate to refer to the relevant provisions being Section 4A(3)(a) of the Act which would read as under:-

"4A. Compensation to be paid when due and penalty for default:-

(3)(a) direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears, pay simple interest thereon at the rate of twelve per cent. per annum or at such higher rate not exceeding the maximum of the leading rates of any scheduled bank as may be specified by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, on the amount due;"

C/FA/2462/2019 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023

7. The impugned award in the operative part indicates the grant of compensation to the tune of Rs.4,59,270/- and interest at the rate of 6%. Clearly the award of interest at the rate of 6% is not in consonance with the statutory provisions and therefore, the award of the Compensation Commissioner is required to be interfered with.

8. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned judgment and order of the Compensation Commissioner would stand modify to read that the respondent No.2-Insurance Company shall pay the compensation of Rs.4,59,270/- with simple interest at the rate of 12% from the date of accident till the date on which the amount is paid.

9. With the aforesaid, the appeal stands allowed. The respondent No.2-Insurance Company is at liberty to deposit the additional amount arising out of the enhanced rate of interest within period of eight weeks.

(A.Y. KOGJE, J) SIDDHARTH Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 24 20:44:46 IST 2023