Purushottam Panigrahi vs Dashru Poyam
2025 Latest Caselaw 337 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Purushottam Panigrahi vs Dashru Poyam on 3 July, 2025

                                          1




              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                              MAC No. 2465 of 2024

1 - Purushottam Panigrahi S/o Udaynath Panigrahi, Beside Dixit Hardware,
Anupama Chowk, District - Bastar, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                         ... Appellant


                                       versus


1 - Dashru Poyam S/o Doga Ram Poyam Aged About 53 Years R/o Erpund, Post
- Harra Kodri, District - Bastar, Chhattisgarh. --- (Applicant No. 1)
2 - Buko Poyam W/o Dashru Poyam Aged About 47 Years R/o Erpund, Post -
Harra Kodri, District - Bastar, Chhattisgarh. --- (Applicant No. 2)
3 - Anil Kumar Korram S/o Dhaniram Korram, R/o Palli Village Nakapara,
Jagdalpur, District - Bastar, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                      ... Respondents

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

Order Sheet

03/07/2025 Mr. Siddharth Rathod, counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Vikas A. Shrivastava, counsel for the respondents No.1 & 2.

Notice issued to respondent No.3 is reported to be unserved as not found in given address.

Heard on I.A. No. 02/2024, application under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act for condonation

of delay in filing the appeal.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 & 2 raised his formal objection to allow aforesaid application.

On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and delay of 224 days in filing instant appeal is hereby condoned in the interest of justice.

Also heard on I.A. No.01/2024, application for grant of ad-interim relief/stay.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in pursuance of the impugned judgment dated 22.02.2024, total amount of compensation along with penalty i.e. Rs.12,47,880/-, has been deposited by the appellant/non- applicant No.1 before the concerned Labour Court. He would further submit that respondents No.1 & 2/claimants have filed application for disbursement of the claim amount, but since there is good case in favour of the appellant, hence, disbursement of amount of compensation may be stayed.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 & 2/claimants would submit that despite order passed by the Labour Court, amount of compensation was not deposited within 45 days, as such, appellant/employer was bound to pay interest @12% per annum from the date of accident, but interest part has not deposited by him. He would further submit that respondents No.1 & 2/claimants are old aged parents of deceased, on whose earning, claimants were dependent, hence, disbursement of amount of compensation may not be stayed.

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties. Since on account of death of daughter of claimants, they have been awarded amount of compensation and claimants seems to be old aged person, therefore, on due consideration, it is directed that 50% amount of compensation, deposited by appellant/employer, be disbursed to the respondents No.1 & 2/claimants and remaining amount shall be kept with the Labour Court till further order or till decision of the instant appeal.

List the case in the week after next.

Sd/-

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) JUDGE

Rukhsar

RUKHSAR BANO