The power is vested with the Court to consider the rate of interest under the Employee's Compensation Act, and the court's decision on the rate of interest is not subject to review unless there is an error apparent on the face of the record.

ORDER :

Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J.

1. Petitioners have filed this review petition under Order 41 Rule 1 CPC read with Section 151 CPC, being aggrieved by order dated 08/09/2020 passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 619/2011 (Smt. Shanti & Ors. Vs. Kanhaiyalal & Anr.).

2. The facts of the case in short are that the petitioners had filed a miscellaneous appeal under Section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, against the award dated 30/11/2010 passed in Case No. 5/98 W.C.A. (Fatal) by Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Labour Court No. 1, Gwalior, whereby Labour Court No. 1 Gwalior has awarded Rs. 2,24,000/- as compensation along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of award. Review Petitioners in aforesaid miscellaneous appeal had prayed that the interest be given from the date of the accident and not from the date of award. It was also prayed that the trial Court has wrongly awarded interest at the rate of 6% per annum, whereas it should be at the rate of 12% per annum.

3. The aforesaid prayers in miscellaneous appeal were partly allowed by this Court by directing that the appellants shall be entitled to the interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the compensation amount from the date of accident, i.e. 29/01/1998, whereas this Court had declined to interfere with the rate of interest, i.e. 6% awarded by the trial Court. Hence, this review petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the review petitioners has submitted that in paragraph 9 of the impugned order, this Court has observed as under:-

"9. So far as the rate of interest awarded by the Trial Court is concerned, it is apparent that the accident relates to the year 1998, therefore, the rate of interest, i.e. 6% awarded by the trial Court is correct and warrants no interference by this Court."

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that Section 4A(3)(a) of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 provides to pay simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum and that provision is mandatory in nature, therefore rate of interest cannot be awarded below 12% per annum. Hence, prayed that the order dated 08/09/2020 passed in M.A. No. 619/2011 may be corrected by enhancing the rate of interest from 6% per annum to 12% per annum.

6. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the review petitioners has relied upon the judgments passed in the cases of Pratap Narayan Singh Deo v. Srinivas Sabata, 1976 ACJ 141 (SC), Kerala State Electricity Board Vs. Valsala K., 2000 ACJ 5 (SC), Saberabibi Yakobbhai Shaik and others Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. And others, 2014 ACJ 467, Praveenbhai S. Khambhayata Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd., 2015 ACJ 936, Jaya Biswal and others Vs. Branch Manager, IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance Company Ltd. And another, 2016 ACJ 721.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No. 2/Insurance Company has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the review petitioners and has submitted that no any ground is raised, therefore review petition is not maintainable. In case the petitioners are not satisfied with the impugned order, they may file appeal against the order. Therefore the prayer made by learned counsel for the review petitioners is beyond the scope of review.

8. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has relied upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. Vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi, AIR 1980 SC 674. It is also submitted that there is no error apparent on the face of record. Hence, prays for rejection of present review petition.

9. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties at length and perused the available record as well as impugned order.

10. This Court has specifically observed in paragraph 9 of the impugned order as under:-

"9. So far as the rate of interest awarded by the Trial Court is concerned, it is apparent that the accident relates to the year 1998, therefore, the rate of interest, i.e. 6% awarded by the trial Court is co