IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR NIRANKARI

th

ON THE 8 OF OCTOBER, 2025 MISC. APPEAL No. 540 of 2017 GULAM GAUS Versus ABDUL MALIK AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Ravish Kumar Deolia - Advocate for the appellant.

None for respondent no.1.

Shri Rajesh Kumar Upadhyay - Advocate for respondent no.2.

ORDER No one appears for respondent no.1 though served.

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 against the order dated 21/12/2016 passed by the Commissioner, Employees Compensation, Labour Court Jabalpur (M.P.) in Case No.113/W.C. Act/2008/non fatal.

2. The appellant by invoking the provisions of Employee's Compensation Act submitted an application for awarding compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- on account of permanent disability occurred on 5/03/2008 while discharging his duty as Conductor.

3. As per the contention of the appellant, at the time of incident, the appellant was aged about 18 years and earning money of Rs.3,000/- per month. Due to the accident occurred on 5/03/2008, he suffered fracture on the left leg. After undergoing operation, an iron rod was implanted in his leg due to which, he suffered 10% permanent disability, thus liable to receive compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-.

4. Respondent no.1 by filing response accepted the claim of the appellant but respondent no.2 denied the claim of the appellant and prays for dismissing the application on account of violation of terms and conditions of the insurance.

5. The Learned Commissioner after appreciating the material available on record allowed the application of the appellant and directed the respondent to pay compensation of Rs.40,748/- separately or jointly.

6. The appellant preferred the appeal against the said order only upto the extent of not awarding interest on compensation amount. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that as per Section 4-A(3) of the Employee's Compensation Act, the appellant is entitled to get the interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the incident. In support of the said contention, he has relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. SIBY GEORGE and others reported in 2012 (134)

FLR 1064.

7. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant and prays for dismissal of the appeal.

8. Section 4-A was inserted in the Employee's Compensation Act 1923 w.e.f. 1/06/1959 and sub-section (3) has been inserted in Section 4-A of the said Act w.e.f. 15/09/1995. Sub-section (3) of Section 4-A is reproduced as under :-

(3) Where any employer is in default in paying the compensation due under this Act within one month from the date it fell due, the Commissioner shall--

(a) direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears, pay simple interest thereon at the rate of twelve per cent per annum or at such higher rate not exceeding the maximum of the lending rates of any scheduled bank as may be specified by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, on the amount due; and (b) if, in his opinion, there is no justification for the delay, direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears and interest thereon, pay a further sum not exceeding fifty per cent, of such amount by way of penalty:

Provided that an order for the payment of penalty shall not be passed under clause (b) without giving a reasonable opportunity to the employer to show cause why it should not be passed.

9. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra) by considering the law laid down in the case of Pratap Narain Singh Deo Vs. Srinivas Sabata and another AIR 1976 SC 222 therein, in para 7 and 8 has held that the workman is entitled to get the compensation from the date of the incident. Para 7 and 8 is reproduced as under :-

7. Section 3 of the Act deals with the employer's liability for compensation. Sub-section (1) of that section provides