Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
UMESH M.ADIGA
Kanakaraju, S/o. S. Govindan – Appellant
Versus
B.H. Dinesh Pai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
UMESH M ADIGA, J.
1. This is an appeal filed by the employee/petitioner in ECA No.22/2017 being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 06.11.2019 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Commissioner (for short 'Commissioner') under Employees Compensation Act, 1923.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was an employee of respondent No.1 and on 05.06.2017 at about 12.30 p.m., during the course of his employment, he met with an accident and sustained grievous injuries. He filed a claim petition before the 'Commissioner' for awarding compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. Respondent No.1 is an employer and respondent No.2 is an Insurer. Both respondents have appeared and filed their respective written statements, putting forth their contentions. They have also denied their liability to pay the compensation etc.
4. The Commissioner framed necessary issues and recorded evidence and on appreciation of the materials available on record, by the impugned judgment and award, allowed the claim petition in part and held that the claimant - petitioner was enti
The court held that under the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, employers cannot refuse to pay interest on compensation for delays, mandating payment of 12% interest from 30 days post-incident.
Employees Compensation Act, 1923 – Section 4A(3)(b) – Insurance Company has no liability for payment of penalty in addition to compensation and interest component.
The insurance company is not liable for interest payments under the Workmen's Compensation Act; liability rests with the employer to pay compensation and associated interest.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the employer to pay compensation under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923, and the court's discretion to impose simple inter....
The court ruled that the employer must pay timely compensation and could face penalties for delays under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the penalty under Section 4-A(3)(b) of the Workmen's Compensation Act is the liability of the employer and not the insurance company.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
