The interpretation of the word 'lie' in the proviso to section 30 (1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act and the recognition of the discretionary powers of the appellate authority to regulate the manner of deposit and control the disbursement of compensation under section 30-a.

V. P. MOHAN KUMAR, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal preferred by the insurance company against the award passed by the commissioner for workmen's compensation, under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, hereinafter referred to as the act'. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal.

( 2 ) THE contention of Mr. Ashok harnahalli, learned counsel for the 1st respondent, put across commendably well is that the appeal will not lie, as the appellant has not complied with the requirement of third proviso to section 30 (1) of the act and, therefore, it has to be rejected and cannot be entertained or admitted for consideration at all.

( 3 ) SECTION 30 of the act reads thus: "30. Appeals. (A) an appeal shall lie to the High Court from the following orders of a commissioner, namely; (a) an order awarding as compensation a lump sum whether by way of redemption of a half monthly payment or otherwise or disallowing a claim in full or in part for a lump sum; (aa) an order awarding interest or penalty under section 4-a; (b) an order refusing to allow redemption of a half monthly payment; (c) an order providing for the distribution of compensation among the dependants of a deceased workman, or disallowing any claim of a person alleging himself to be such dependant; (d) an order allowing or disallowing any claim for the amount of an indemnity under the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 12; or (e) an order refusing to register a memorandum of agreement or registering the same or providing for the registration of the same subject to conditions : provided that no appeal shall lie against any order unless a substantial question of law is involved in the appeal and, in the case of an order other than an order such as is referred to in clause (b), unless the amount in dispute in the appeal is not less than three hundred rupees; provided further that no appeal shall lie in any case in which the parties have agreed to abide by the decision of the commissioner, or in which the order of the commissioner gives effect to an agreement come to by the parties : provided further that no appeal by an employer under clause (a) shall lie unless the memorandum of appeal is accompanied by a certificate by the commissioner to the effect that the appellant has deposited with him the amount payable under the order appealed against. (2) the period of limitation for an appeal under this section shall be sixty days. (3) the provisions of section 5 of the indian Limitation act. 1908 shall be applicable to appeals under this section. " in this case, admittedly, the memorandum of appeal was not accompanied by a certificate of the commissioner for workmen's compensation to the effect that the appellant had deposited the amount payable under the award. On the contrary, on the date of presentation of the memorandum of appeal to this court, the appellant had made the said deposit of the amount awarded, before this court. This, according to the counsel for the 1st respondent is not proper compliance of law to render the appeal competent. the third proviso to section 30 of the act relied upon by the learned counsel for the 1st respondent states (omitting words are not relevant to the context) that "no appeal by an employer under clause (a) shall lie unless the memorandum of appeal is accompanied by a certificate. . . . . to the effect that the appellant has deposited. . . . . the amount payable under the order appealed against. " according to him, it means that no appeal shall lie at All unless such a certificate as contemplated under the third proviso accompanies the memorandum of appeal. He fortifies his submission by relying on the decision of this court in mm. Mishrikoti v muktumsab hasansab asoti. This court considered similar question in the said decision. A division bench of this court had to consider the effect of filing an appeal without complying with the requirement

Click Here to Read the rest of this document