ORDER :

1. The above appeal has been filed against an award for Rs. 10,46,200/- with interest @ 9% per annum from date of claim i.e. from 21.11.2016 and costs of Rs. 27,332/-. The Claimant is one Mr. M. Ashok Kumar who suffered grievous injury and was assessed disablement by Medical Board vide orders of this Court made in Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Prabhu dated 12.04.2016, including medical expenses of Rs. 3,54,000/-. A simple nudge was sufficient to the Counsel for Insurance Company to surrender the appeal to the larger cause of community of victims in these pandemic times. The Insurer has deposited Rs. 25,000/- towards statutory deposit. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the insurance company fairly submitted that the entire balance amount including interest and cost will be deposited by the insurance company and that he has instructions to state so before this court. Recording the said submission, the Insurer is hereby directed to deposit the entire award with interest and costs less statutory deposit within 2 weeks of receipt of this order by email. It is pertinent to note that despite the grant of interest @ 9% p.a. the Insurer and its Counsel have gracefully not made an issue of it. However, it is made clear that the affirmation of the award with interest at 9% p.a. shall not be treated as a precedent, since the ordinary rate of interest is 7.5% p.a. only.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant insurance company submitted that under normal circumstances, he would have withdrawn this appeal. However he was compelled to bring to the notice of this Court, a vexed issue which has its origins in an Insertion by Finance Act, 2003 W.E.F. 01.06.2003 to Sec. 194A of Income Tax Act, 1961. The learned counsel pointed out that while satisfying this award in MCOP No. 79/2018, the interest liability would be subject to Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) under Sec. 194A. But the Insurer submitted that they were facing a situation akin to facing between the devil and the deep sea. The present factual and legal position in Tamil Nadu postulates that in cases where the Insurer satisfies the award and deducts TDS, they face the prospect of attachment by way of execution petitions. As live examples 4 CRPs in CRP Nos. 587/2017, 3622/2017 and 3623/2017 and CRP No. 136671/2019 which are pending before this Court against orders of attachment in Execution Petitions by the respective Tribunals was brought to the notice of this court.

3. Per contra, if the Insurer does not apply TDS, they run the risk of facing penal consequences under Sec. 201 of Income Tax Act, 1961 as per which the Principal Officer of the insurance company could be subjected to a fine of Rupees One thousand per day for non-compliance, when last heard.

4. In such a stifling atmosphere, the Insurer has called upon this Court to make it clear as to which of the two courses they should embrace in this case, to avoid either of the difficult situations. Despite the Insurer gracefully agreeing to satisfy the award with interest & costs, they are in an undeniable quandary. This Court is duty bound to address the issue and not shy away from it, since this issue is not immune to the Pandemic. This Court may have to consider discovering a vaccine to solve the viral impact of this TDS issue.

5. Accordingly, this Court deemed it fit and proper to requisition the services of amicus curiae in Mr. R. Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Advocate, Mr. V. Lakshminarayanan, Advocate, Mr. M.B. Raghavan, Advocate and Mr. N.P. Vijayakumar, Advocate to address the issue. In addition, since this issue is umbilically tied with the Income Tax Department, Mr. J. Narayanaswamy, Sr. Standing Counsel was requested to assist the Court to satisfactorily deal with the issue. This Court, has the luxury of time and the Counsel also readily agreed and we analyzed various issues threadbare to consider as to what could be the best vaccine in the present circumstances, to protect the interest of the stake holders. Ap