Kerala High Court
M/S.Poabs Granites Private Limited vs The Commissioner For Employees ... on 12 April, 2024
Author: Murali Purushothaman
Bench: Murali Purushothaman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 23772 OF 2013
PETITIONER:
M/S.POABS GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED
KUTTOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA-689106, REPRESENTED BY THE
DIRECTOR, K.A.ABRAHAM.
BY ADV
SRI.N.JAMES KOSHY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION
THOZHIL BHAVAN, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
695 033.
2 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM, POLACHIRACKAL CHAMBERS,
P.B.NO.1109, K.K.ROAD, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686002, REPRESENTED BY
ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER.
3 BIJU V.
BINU BHAVANAM, P.O.NOORANADU, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA
-690 505.
BY ADVS.
T.U.SUJITH KUMAR
SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH
SRI.A.K.MOHAMED ALI
SRI.KKM.SHERIF
SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 23772 OF 2013
: 2 :
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P7 order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Thiruvananthapuram, awarding an amount of Rs.8,44,608/-(Rupees eight lakhs forty four thousand six hundred and eight only) for the personal injuries caused to the workman, the 3rd respondent, while in employment with the petitioner.
2. The 3rd respondent, while working as Plant Operator in the petitioner company, sustained injuries resulting in the amputation of right arm just below the elbow. As per schedule I of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, the loss of earning capacity of the 3 rd respondent is 80%. The petitioner company is having insurance policy with the 2nd respondent, New India WP(C) NO. 23772 OF 2013 : 3 : Assurance Company Ltd. and the petitioner submitted Ext.P1 'report of accident to workmen' before the 2 nd respondent. Ext.P2 is the medical report issued by orthopaedic surgeon. After due verification of the claim, the Insurance company issued a cheque for Rs.4,25,030/- towards compensation for the injuries sustained by the 3rd respondent. Ext.P5 memorandum of agreement was also executed between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent stating that the 3rd respondent has accepted the amount of Rs.4,25,030/- in full settlement of every claim under the Workmen's Compensation Act in respect of all disablement arising out of the accident. It is stated that a copy of Ext.P5 agreement was also submitted to the 1st respondent.
3. While so, the petitioner received a show cause WP(C) NO. 23772 OF 2013 : 4 : notice dated 16.08.2013 from the 1 st respondent directing the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs.4,19,578/- being the balance compensation payable to the 3rd respondent. On enquiry made by the petitioner, it is understood that the said show cause notice has been issued pursuant to Ext.P7 order dated 17.04.2012 passed by the 1st respondent.
4. In Ext.P7, the 1st respondent has assessed the workmen's compensation amount in respect of the 3 rd respondent as Rs.8,44,608/-. Since an amount of Rs.4,25,030/- was already paid by the 2nd respondent insurance Company, the petitioner was directed to pay the balance amount of Rs.4,19,578/-(Rupees four lakhs nineteen thousand five hundred and seventy eight only) with 12% interest for the entire amount. WP(C) NO. 23772 OF 2013 : 5 :
5. The petitioner submits that Ext.P7 order was passed without notice to the petitioner and the 2 nd respondent and prays for setting aside the same. It is also contended by the petitioner that the 1 st respondent has no jurisdiction to pass an order in the nature of Ext.P7.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the insurance company and the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent workman.
7. It is not disputed that Ext.P7 order was passed without hearing the petitioner and the insurance company. Ext.P7 order entails civil consequences to the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. Accordingly, the same is set aside being one passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. Since Ext.P7 order is set WP(C) NO. 23772 OF 2013 : 6 : aside, there will be a direction to the 1 st respondent to consider the matter afresh and pass orders after hearing the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It will be open to the parties to raise all their contentions before the 1st respondent.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE SRJ WP(C) NO. 23772 OF 2013 : 7 : APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23772/2013 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ACCIDENT REPORT IN FORM NO.AC-9 DT.16-6-2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER EMPLOYER TO 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL REPORT ISSUED BY ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEON TO 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM AC-6 DATED.26-5-2011. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED.17-8-2011 SENT TO 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF R1 FOR RS.4,25,030/- DATED 10-8-2011 FOR PAYMENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT DATED 9-5-2011 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31-8-2011 ISSUED BY PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND REPORT OF THE FATAL ACCIDENT IN FORM EE.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER DATED 17-4-2012 OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 16-8- 2013 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 24-8-2013 SENT BY PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.