Gujarat High Court
Vishaldeep Tiles Co Through One Of ... vs Late Maniben Alias Nabuben Jethabhai ... on 2 August, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2457/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2457 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2024
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2457 of 2024
==========================================================
VISHALDEEP TILES CO THROUGH ONE OF PARTNER HASHMUKHBHAI
HARIBHAI PRAJAPATI
Versus
LATE MANIBEN ALIAS NABUBEN JETHABHAI SOLANKI SINCE DIED
THROUGH LH & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ARJUN S RATHOD(12662) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR PRATHAM P JOSHI(12796) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Defendant(s) No. 1,1.1
MR YOGI K GADHIA(5913) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 02/08/2024
ORAL ORDER
This appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's
Compensation Act, 1923 by the appellant-original respondent
No.1 challenging the judgment and award dated 13.5.2022
passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen
Compensation Act, Labour Court, Rajkot in Workmen
Compensation Fatal Case No.2 of 2015.
Upon joint request of learned advocates for the parties,
this appeal is taken up for final hearing.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2457/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2024
undefined
Heard learned advocate for the appellant - Mr. Arjun S.
Rathod and learned advocate for the respondent - Mr. Yogi K.
Gadhia.
Learned Advocate for the appellant Mr. Arjun S. Rathod
submitted that the appellant is running a business of ceramic
tiles and one Maniben Nabuben - wife of present respondent
No.1 was serving as a labourer with the appellant company on a
monthly salary of Rs.3,500/-. It is submitted that while peforimg
her duties, Maniben fell down and sustained injury on
24.2.2011. The employee expired at Morbi.
The claim application was filed by the husband of
deceased, claiming Rs.2,67,908/- with 12 % interest per annum
penalty from the opponent.
It is submitted that the present appellant is insured with
the respondent No.2 - Insurance Company. It is submitted that
the present appeal is filed on the limited ground of awarding
principal amount compensation upon the present appellant.
It is pointed out from the record as well as from the
impugned judgment that the learned Commissioner has
observed that in the policy there is no condition of payment of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2457/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2024
undefined
penalty and interest resultantly, the Insurance Company is not
held liable for the interest and penalty. However, under the Act
as well under the policy, the Insurance Company is required to
pay the principal amount of compensation.
It is submitted that the appellant can only be saddled with
the liability of interest and penalty,however, for the principal
amount of compensation, the appellant is not liable.
Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Yogi K. Gadhia for the
Insurance Company fairly conceded that the proposition of law
that under the Act as well as under the Policy, the Insurance
Company can be held liable for the principal amount of
compensation, but for the interest and penalty, the Insurance
Company cannot be held liable.
I have considered the oral as well documentary evidence
produced on record. The undisputed fact that the deceased was
an employee of the appellant and the appellant was insured with
the respondent No.2 under the Workmen Compensation Policy.
The learned Commissioner has taken into consideration the
evidence of the parties and also considered the law laid down in
the case of Kamala Chaturveda vs. National Insurance
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2457/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2024
undefined
Company Limited reported in (2006) ACJ 1699, wherein the
Insurance Company was held liable for interest and penalty as
the Insurance Company admitted their liability in insurance
policy whereas in the present case, on perusal of the Insurance
Policy, there is no clause of coverage of liability to pay interest
and penalty to the aggrieved person.
It is submitted that the respondent No.2 has deposited
Rs.2,67,908/- with the learned Commissioner pursuant to
judgment and award. A payment voucher dated 22.7.2022 is
placed on record by learned advocate for the respondent No.2.
The same is taken on record.
In view of the settled principle of law, the judgment and
award dated 13.5.2022 passed by the learned Commissioner for
Workmen Compensation Act, Labour Court, Rajkot in Workmen
Compensation Fatal Case No.2 of 2015 is modified.
The original claimant shall be entitled to Rs.2,67,907/-
from original opponent No.2-Insurance Company and the
original claimant shall be entitled to 12% interest from
opponent No.1 viz. Present Appellant with 50% penalty on
Rs.2,67,908/- which comes to Rs.1,33,954/- within 30 days from
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2457/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2024
undefined
the receipt of this order.
The Insurance Company is exonerated from the liability of
interest and penalty. Rest of the judgment and award is
unaltered.
With this observation, the First Appeal is partly allowed.
Civil Application is disposed of.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
MANISH MISHRA
