Madras High Court
S.Ramesh vs M.Babu on 18 January, 2021
C.M.A.No.610 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.01.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
C.M.A.No.610 of 2015
S.Ramesh ..Appellant
Vs.
1.M.Babu
2.M.Manickam
3.M/s.New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
Divisional Office, Premier Complex,
Junction Yercaud Main Road,
Alagapuram, Salem – 16.
..Respondents
Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 30 of the
Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, against the order dated 12.03.2013
made in W.C.No.225 of 2008 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of
Labour, Salem.
For Appellant : Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel
For Respondents : Mrs.S.K.Sumathy for RR1 & 2
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.610 of 2015
JUDGMENT
The Award dated 12.03.2013 in W.C.No.225 of 2008 is under
challenge in the present civil miscellaneous appeal.
2. The claimant is the appellant. The appellant states that he was a
workman employed in the first opposite party as a driver in a lorry
bearing Registration No.TN-30-F-1119. On 23.10.2007 at about 2.30
a.m., the petitioner sustained grievous injury on account of the accident
during the course of the employment. Thus, he filed claim petition under
the provisions of the employees compensation Act.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour adjudicated the issues
with reference to the documents and evidence and passed an award
granting compensation of Rs.3,38,789/- along with interest at the rate of
12% as prescribed in the statute.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the
assessment of disability as 70% by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour
is inadequate. The petitioner lost his right leg and his right leg was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.610 of 2015
amputated. Therefore, he is entitled for 100% disability and accordingly,
the compensation is to be enhanced. The learned counsel for the
appellant is of the opinion that the appellant is a driver and due to
amputation of his right leg, he is unable to perform his duties as driver.
Therefore, he has to be treated as 100% disability.
5. The concept of 100% disability and the assessment of disability
with reference to the accident are clearly stipulated in the statute itself.
Schedule 2 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, contemplates
that loss of earning capacity with reference to disability sustained by the
victims as far as amputation below hip with stump exceeding 12.70 cms
in length measured from tip of great trenchanter but not beyond middle
thigh as remains as 70%.
6. In the present case, the Deputy Commissioner of Labour fixed
the disability as 70% with reference to the statute and therefore, this
Court cannot interfere with the compensation granted by the Deputy
Commissioner of Labour.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.610 of 2015
7. The learned counsel for the appellant is of the opinion that
beyond the prescription in the statute, the other aspects regarding the
performance of a particular duty is to be considered.
8. This Court is of the considered opinion that any application
filed under the provisions of the Employees Compensation Act, dealt
with in accordance with the provisions of the Act and this Court cannot
exercise its discretion for the purpose of enhancing the compensation
and such enhancement would lead to bad precedents. Once the statute
prescribes particular mode of compensation to be granted, is to be
followed scrupulously.
9. In these circumstances, this Court has no hesitation in arriving
at the conclusion that the Deputy Commissioner of Labour has rightly
fixed the disability as 70% and granted compensation of Rs.3,38,789/-,
along with interest at the rate of 12% as per the statute and the same is to
be confirmed. However, it is clarified that the Deputy Commissioner of
Labour granted the interest at the rate of 12% per annum in the event of
not depositing the compensation amount within a period of 30 days.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.610 of 2015
Such condition imposed is in violation of Section 4(A) of the Employees
Compensation Act. The interest is to be paid with effect from the date of
the accident. Accordingly, the award stands modified to that extent.
10. Thus, the appellant is entitled for the interest at the rate of
12% per annum from the date of the accident. Accordingly, the amount
of compensation stands confirmed. The interest at the rate of 12% per
annum is directed to be paid from the date of the accident.
11. In view of the facts and circumstances, the award dated
12.03.2013 in W.C.No.225 of 2008, stands modified and C.M.A.No.610
of 2015 stands allowed in part. No costs.
18.01.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-Speaking Order
gsk
To
The Deputy Commissioner of Labour,
Salem.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.610 of 2015
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
gsk
C.M.A.No.610 of 2015
18.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
