The New India Assurance Com. Ltd, Branch ... vs Mangesh S/O Sadashivrao Kalsarpe And ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 1609 Bom

Bombay High Court

The New India Assurance Com. Ltd, Branch ... vs Mangesh S/O Sadashivrao Kalsarpe And ... on 19 January, 2024

Author: G. A. Sanap

Bench: G. A. Sanap

2024:BHC-NAG:931


                                                              1                             FA633.10 (J).odt


                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 : NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.


                                          FIRST APPEAL NO. 633 OF 2010


                   APPELLANT                    : The New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
                                                  Branch at Yeotmal, through the Regional Manager,
                                                  the Regional Office, th eNew India Assurance
                                                  Company Limited, M.E.C.L. Building,
                                                  Seminary Hills, Nagpur - 440 006.

                                                               VERSUS

                   RESPONDENTS                  : 1] Mangesh Sadashivrao Kalsarpe,
                                                     Aged about 30 years,
                                                     R/o Kopra (Jankar), Post - Dighi,
                                                     Tq. Babhulgaon, Dist. Yavatmal.

                                                  2] Factory Manager,
                                                     Saw Ginning and Pressing Factory,
                                                     Babhulgaon, Tq. Babhulgaon,
                                                     Dist. Yavatmal

                                                  3] Zonal Manager,
                                                     Maharashtra State Co-op. Cotton Growers
                                                     Marketing Federation Ltd.,
                                                     Darwha Road, Udyog Bhawan,
                                                     Yavatmal.

                   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Mr. Ashish W. Paunikar, Advocate for the appellant
                             Mr. D. C. R. Mishra, Advocate for the respondent no.1
                   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                           CORAM : G. A. SANAP, J.
                                           DATED : JANUARY 19, 2024.


                   ORAL JUDGMENT

2 FA633.10 (J).odt

1. In this appeal, filed under Section 30 of the Workmens'

Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1923"

for short), challenge is to the judgment and order dated 01.07.2009

passed by the Commissioner under the Act of 1923, Yavatmal, in

W.C.A. Case No. 19/2003, whereby the claim for compensation filed

by the respondent no.1 was allowed.

2. At the time of admission of the appeal, following

substantial question of law has been framed :

"Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant Insurance Company was liable to pay interest on the compensation amount ?"

3. The only question that needs to be addressed is whether

the order grating interest from the date of the order on the quantified

amount of compensation would be against the law or not ? It needs to

be stated that the learned Commissioner did not award the interest on

the amount of compensation from the date of the accident or from the

date of the application. The order would be assailable on this ground, if

the interest had been awarded from the date of the accident or from the

date of the application. The insurance company has deposited the 3 FA633.10 (J).odt

amount of compensation. The insurance company, as per impugned

order would be liable to pay interest from the date of the order till

deposit of the amount.

4. In view of above, I conclude that learned Commissioner

has not committed any illegality. Accordingly, I answer the substantial

question in the affirmative. As a result of this, the appeal deserves to be

dismissed. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed.

5. The amount deposited by the appellant-Insurance

Company in this appeal with accrued interest, be paid over to

respondent no.1. No order as to costs.

( G. A. SANAP, J. ) Diwale

Signed by: DIWALE Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 23/01/2024 18:30:12