2023 Supreme(Online)(TEL) 6659

[ 3216 I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 686 0F 2010 Appeal Under section 30 of workmen's compensation Act against the order dated 3l4l2o1o made in w.c. No. 182 of 2oo4on the fire of thi court of G commissioner for workmen's compensation and Deputy commissioner or Laoour, Nizamabad.

Between:

V.Kashinath, S/o.Ghondge Ex-Labour Rl/o.Auto Nagar, Nizamabad.

.APPELLANT/CLAIMANT AND

1. GXrishna Goud, S/o.Venkat Narsa Goud, Aged Major Lorry Owner R/o.5-2-

213, \Itl eekly Bazar, Nrzamabad.

2.

United lndia lnsurance Co L_td, rep by Branch Manager O/o.Anupama Colony, Jagdalpur, Bastar District, M.p.

3.

Shaik Abdut Rahamanl p/g.Slflk Hidar, Aged Maiot No.7_11_23, Khoja Colony, Nizamabad District, A.p.

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: SRt. K SARALA MAHENDER REODY Counsel for the Respondent.No.2: SRl. SHEETAL KUMAR RAVULA The Court Delivered the following: JUDGMENT I]{E HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMA.N CIVII , IVIISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.6Ti€, O]T 2()1O JUDGMENT:

1. Th<: Cii; Miscellaneorrs Appezrl has lrr:.en filed bv the claimant ,1giur sl lhc au.i,d .lrlted 03.O4.2C 1O rL \.\r.il.No.1B2 of 2OO1, olr 1l'r: lile of the Commissio ter f<;r Workmen's Compens:rticn a,rd Deput-t Commissioner ol Labc,.rr, Nizamabad (for short 'Corr nissioner"), 'uvherein and wherelrv, t-'re r;laim of the appella n t \,'..1 l)artl-\' arllou'cd grantin6 Con-Lper)sation of Rs.1,69,9it1/-i: rr:h-rding stermp fee and advocat(: f:c) uith interest at the rate of l(ll, per annUm from the date ,tf

amounts are de ltosited

2. The corrtr 1'.ion of thc learned counsel for lh,_. appellant is that rvher-r tht:rt ir; zrn admission from the owr er of tlre vehicle that the appellzrnt rr ar; paid Rs.3,500/ per montlr, thr. (lornmissioner ought to harre : :r:epted such admission and griLrrte,.l tlre monthly earnings as ain rilted. Inslead of that the Corrmiss o.ter has taken the mir-rin. unt \\ ages p.r1/al)le to the cleaner. urtl-rer, it is F contended th a1 he Con-rmissioner has co.nnrit ,e,l rrrror u,ith regarcl 1o qranr r)f inter€sl. As per the statule, t te instrralce Companv has t0 a1, inl-err:st from the clate of acctrlr: at, inslead of

1;

that the Comtnisstoncr has given interest from the date of default in payment of amount lrithin thirty days from the date of award tilt the amounts are deposited. Such findings are contrary to the statute and law upheld by the Apex Court.

3. The learncd counsel representing for the Insurance Company has submitted that the Commissioner has rightly assessed the percentage of disability and loss of earning capacity based on the evidence of AW2/doctor. Further, he has denied the employer and employee relationship between the appellant and the first respondent. Further, he has also contended that the award also shows that injuries are of five years old' As seen from the order impugned, Doctor found that the injuries were of five years old. This means, the injuries, which are the foundation for assessment of physical disability, were a-11 prior to the accident.

Therefore, the entire case must be disbelieved.

4 Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

5. On a perusal of the records, except the admission of the owner, nothing has been brought on record to show that the paid Rs.3,500/- per month. In the said appellart was circumstances, the Commissioner has taken minimum wages p:U,al)le to lh,r Ir.iv,:r eurr sucit :tltpro:tt lt ol 1lr, t-lotttlttissiotrer does not sul'lc'r- r' orlr an] Pcn,ersitr so as to itlt, rl-,rrc l:r'this Clor:r't. Further, thc Cr n,missioncr has rightlr' :tss rs:,t:d -lrt phvsical disabilitl and Irsrs of e:rrning capacitv at (r0(1 Lr:tscd on the evidence ttf Itc I- lr:tor

6. The orrlv c:-rIention to be sLtstaine

interest. The st:L u le conte lnplates the pa,\'mcn t of i t1 erest @) l2o per arlnum 'l-o:-n tl'e date it fell cltrc. The comp('nsitt ()rt isi required \ to be paid b), t h,r emplol'er for- lhe injuries' stlstirin(d in tl-re \

accident u,ithirL : tl days from the clate of zrccidt nt. [f s;uc]r arnount \

is not paid, thert s al oblrgatior-r on the empkryer to pa/ interest r contemplated rrnder the statute. The stzLtuter c:ontemplates AS interest (i 12o/) rer annurl and that interest has bo brr granted from 31"' day ol ::rccidenl till the amount is dt pcs tr:d. In this regard, the (lornr Lir;sioner has committed error igno:irtg slatlltory requirement by r''stricting the intcrest lrom thr: datt: rtl'rlefault in payment of amor nt within the time fixerd by hc CornnLissioner. The Commissiont r ras fixecl 30 davs lor l)aymert ,r[ ,;rrnrFensation from the clatr: o award in default in morrt of such I)a)

compensation, in e -est u,as aq,arded. This finciinll r:r [ri|es to be set aside ,t

7. In the rcsult, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partlv aliowed and thc findings of the Cornmissiol-rer for Workmen's Compensation and Deput-v Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad, in the award dated O3.04.201O in W.C.No. 182 of 2OO4, in granting interest on the fixed compensation is modified and the Insurance Company is directed to pay interest on the compensation assessed from the 31"t day of accident till the date of deposit. No costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, sha1l stand closed.

SDI K. SRINIVASA RAO /

JOINT REGISTRAR COPY// (2A //TRUE SECTION-OFFICER To, 1. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad (With Records)

2. One CC to Sri. K. Sarala ltlahender Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

3: One CC to Sri. R. Sheetal Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]

4.

Two CD Copies TJ Pr'tc., HIGH COURT DATED:19 0412023 .'43:=at STAI€

1,1;i:'^'

? I NB o ) $\

1t )

JUDGMEN T )

J \:. ,, c CMA.No.6€ 6 of 2010 -\! -- i.'

PARTLY AI,T.OWING THE CMA WITHOUT (I:OSTS. ,{o'.C. 6\re [ 3216 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 686 OF 2010 Between:

V.Kashinath, S/o.Ghondge Ex-Labour R/o.Auto Nagar, Nizamabad-

...APPELLANT/CLAIMANT AND .

'1 G.Krishna Goud, S/o-Venkat Narsa Goud, Aged tvlajor Lorry Owner R/o.5-2-

2/3, Weekly Bazar, Nizamabad.

2. United lndia lnsurance Co Ltd, rep by Branch Manager O/o.Anupama Colony, Jagdalpur, Bastar District, M.P.

3. Shaik Abdul Rahaman, S/o.Shaik Hidar, Aged Major No.7-11-23, Khoja Colony, Nizamabad District, A.P.

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appeal Under Section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act against the Order dald 31412010 made in W.C. No. 182 of 20O4on the file of the Court of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad.

This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. K. SARAK MAHENDER REDDY, Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri. R. SHEETAL KUMAR, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows

1 f l.rat . e Ciyil N4iscr:llaneous Appeal be and rereb' i. P:lrtly Allowed and rhc'rr 1 rgs oI tl.l-. Corrnrrssioner for \rVc.kntr:n: Corrper.:;ation and l)epLl (. ommissioner of Labour, Nizamabad '-la

2 .re award dated 3/4i2010 in W C. \o .f ;' of 2004 rn granting t r. tel €l -: ln the f xed compensation is n od [rr:r ]nd lh(] Insurance Oonrpz r; is directe,J to pay interest on the (:orrpenr;trtio I assessed from ';

irl ''1 oa s accident till the date of Deposrt.

SDr- l'1. SRINIVASA RAO .IOINT.REGISTRAR

1+:

//TRUE COPY//

:;ECTION OFFICER To, 1 The C: nrnissioner for Workmen's Compensalion an 1 .)eptty Commi ;sioner of Labour, Nrzamabad (With Recorcis'

2. Two C[ C;opies IJ ?i"rC,'.

HIGH COURT DATED:1 9'0412023 DECREE CMA.No.6it6; of 2010 PARTLY AI-LOWING THE CMA WITHOUT 3OSTS.

{t'rC,

r\s\,{r,

amounts are de ltosited

2. The corrtr 1'.ion of thc learned counsel for lh,_. appellant is that rvher-r tht:rt ir; zrn admission from the owr er of tlre vehicle that the appellzrnt rr ar; paid Rs.3,500/ per montlr, thr. (lornmissioner ought to harre : :r:epted such admission and griLrrte,.l tlre monthly earnings as ain rilted. Inslead of that the Corrmiss o.ter has taken the mir-rin. unt \\ ages p.r1/al)le to the cleaner. urtl-rer, it is F contended th a1 he Con-rmissioner has co.nnrit ,e,l rrrror u,ith regarcl 1o qranr r)f inter€sl. As per the statule, t te instrralce Companv has t0 a1, inl-err:st from the clate of acctrlr: at, inslead of

1;

that the Comtnisstoncr has given interest from the date of default in payment of amount lrithin thirty days from the date of award tilt the amounts are deposited. Such findings are contrary to the statute and law upheld by the Apex Court.

3. The learncd counsel representing for the Insurance Company has submitted that the Commissioner has rightly assessed the percentage of disability and loss of earning capacity based on the evidence of AW2/doctor. Further, he has denied the employer and employee relationship between the appellant and the first respondent. Further, he has also contended that the award also shows that injuries are of five years old' As seen from the order impugned, Doctor found that the injuries were of five years old. This means, the injuries, which are the foundation for assessment of physical disability, were a-11 prior to the accident.

Therefore, the entire case must be disbelieved.

4 Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

5. On a perusal of the records, except the admission of the owner, nothing has been brought on record to show that the paid Rs.3,500/- per month. In the said appellart was circumstances, the Commissioner has taken minimum wages p:U,al)le to lh,r Ir.iv,:r eurr sucit :tltpro:tt lt ol 1lr, t-lotttlttissiotrer does not sul'lc'r- r' orlr an] Pcn,ersitr so as to itlt, rl-,rrc l:r'this Clor:r't. Further, thc Cr n,missioncr has rightlr' :tss rs:,t:d -lrt phvsical disabilitl and Irsrs of e:rrning capacitv at (r0(1 Lr:tscd on the evidence ttf Itc I- lr:tor

6. The orrlv c:-rIention to be sLtstaine

interest. The st:L u le conte lnplates the pa,\'mcn t of i t1 erest @) l2o per arlnum 'l-o:-n tl'e date it fell cltrc. The comp('nsitt ()rt isi required \ to be paid b), t h,r emplol'er for- lhe injuries' stlstirin(d in tl-re \

accident u,ithirL : tl days from the clate of zrccidt nt. [f s;uc]r arnount \

is not paid, thert s al oblrgatior-r on the empkryer to pa/ interest r contemplated rrnder the statute. The stzLtuter c:ontemplates AS interest (i 12o/) rer annurl and that interest has bo brr granted from 31"' day ol ::rccidenl till the amount is dt pcs tr:d. In this regard, the (lornr Lir;sioner has committed error igno:irtg slatlltory requirement by r''stricting the intcrest lrom thr: datt: rtl'rlefault in payment of amor nt within the time fixerd by hc CornnLissioner. The Commissiont r ras fixecl 30 davs lor l)aymert ,r[ ,;rrnrFensation from the clatr: o award in default in morrt of such I)a)

compensation, in e -est u,as aq,arded. This finciinll r:r [ri|es to be set aside ,t

7. In the rcsult, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partlv aliowed and thc findings of the Cornmissiol-rer for Workmen's Compensation and Deput-v Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad, in the award dated O3.04.201O in W.C.No. 182 of 2OO4, in granting interest on the fixed compensation is modified and the Insurance Company is directed to pay interest on the compensation assessed from the 31"t day of accident till the date of deposit. No costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, sha1l stand closed.

SDI K. SRINIVASA RAO /

JOINT REGISTRAR COPY// (2A //TRUE SECTION-OFFICER To, 1. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad (With Records)

2. One CC to Sri. K. Sarala ltlahender Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

3: One CC to Sri. R. Sheetal Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]

4.

Two CD Copies TJ Pr'tc., HIGH COURT DATED:19 0412023 .'43:=at STAI€

1,1;i:'^'

? I NB o ) $\

1t )

JUDGMEN T )

J \:. ,, c CMA.No.6€ 6 of 2010 -\! -- i.'

PARTLY AI,T.OWING THE CMA WITHOUT (I:OSTS. ,{o'.C. 6\re [ 3216 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 686 OF 2010 Between:

V.Kashinath, S/o.Ghondge Ex-Labour R/o.Auto Nagar, Nizamabad-

...APPELLANT/CLAIMANT AND .

'1 G.Krishna Goud, S/o-Venkat Narsa Goud, Aged tvlajor Lorry Owner R/o.5-2-

2/3, Weekly Bazar, Nizamabad.

2. United lndia lnsurance Co Ltd, rep by Branch Manager O/o.Anupama Colony, Jagdalpur, Bastar District, M.P.

3. Shaik Abdul Rahaman, S/o.Shaik Hidar, Aged Major No.7-11-23, Khoja Colony, Nizamabad District, A.P.

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appeal Under Section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act against the Order dald 31412010 made in W.C. No. 182 of 20O4on the file of the Court of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad.

This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. K. SARAK MAHENDER REDDY, Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri. R. SHEETAL KUMAR, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows

1 f l.rat . e Ciyil N4iscr:llaneous Appeal be and rereb' i. P:lrtly Allowed and rhc'rr 1 rgs oI tl.l-. Corrnrrssioner for \rVc.kntr:n: Corrper.:;ation and l)epLl (. ommissioner of Labour, Nizamabad '-la

2 .re award dated 3/4i2010 in W C. \o .f ;' of 2004 rn granting t r. tel €l -: ln the f xed compensation is n od [rr:r ]nd lh(] Insurance Oonrpz r; is directe,J to pay interest on the (:orrpenr;trtio I assessed from ';

irl ''1 oa s accident till the date of Deposrt.

SDr- l'1. SRINIVASA RAO .IOINT.REGISTRAR

1+:

//TRUE COPY//

:;ECTION OFFICER To, 1 The C: nrnissioner for Workmen's Compensalion an 1 .)eptty Commi ;sioner of Labour, Nrzamabad (With Recorcis'

2. Two C[ C;opies IJ ?i"rC,'.

HIGH COURT DATED:1 9'0412023 DECREE CMA.No.6it6; of 2010 PARTLY AI-LOWING THE CMA WITHOUT 3OSTS.

{t'rC,

r\s\,{r,

interest. The st:L u le conte lnplates the pa,\'mcn t of i t1 erest @) l2o per arlnum 'l-o:-n tl'e date it fell cltrc. The comp('nsitt ()rt isi required \ to be paid b), t h,r emplol'er for- lhe injuries' stlstirin(d in tl-re \

accident u,ithirL : tl days from the clate of zrccidt nt. [f s;uc]r arnount \

is not paid, thert s al oblrgatior-r on the empkryer to pa/ interest r contemplated rrnder the statute. The stzLtuter c:ontemplates AS interest (i 12o/) rer annurl and that interest has bo brr granted from 31"' day ol ::rccidenl till the amount is dt pcs tr:d. In this regard, the (lornr Lir;sioner has committed error igno:irtg slatlltory requirement by r''stricting the intcrest lrom thr: datt: rtl'rlefault in payment of amor nt within the time fixerd by hc CornnLissioner. The Commissiont r ras fixecl 30 davs lor l)aymert ,r[ ,;rrnrFensation from the clatr: o award in default in morrt of such I)a)

compensation, in e -est u,as aq,arded. This finciinll r:r [ri|es to be set aside ,t

7. In the rcsult, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partlv aliowed and thc findings of the Cornmissiol-rer for Workmen's Compensation and Deput-v Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad, in the award dated O3.04.201O in W.C.No. 182 of 2OO4, in granting interest on the fixed compensation is modified and the Insurance Company is directed to pay interest on the compensation assessed from the 31"t day of accident till the date of deposit. No costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, sha1l stand closed.

SDI K. SRINIVASA RAO /

JOINT REGISTRAR COPY// (2A //TRUE SECTION-OFFICER To, 1. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad (With Records)

2. One CC to Sri. K. Sarala ltlahender Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

3: One CC to Sri. R. Sheetal Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]

4.

Two CD Copies TJ Pr'tc., HIGH COURT DATED:19 0412023 .'43:=at STAI€

1,1;i:'^'

? I NB o ) $\

1t )