Kerala High Court
Mohammed vs Cochin Port Trust on 6 July, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2002ACJ1039
JUDGMENT R. Rajendra Babu, J.
1. The appellant, a workman of the respondent, sustained injuries in an accident out of and in the course of his employment on 20.5.1986. He was under treatment from 20.5.1986 till 31.12.1987. The Chief Medical Officer of the Cochin Port Trust assessed the partial permanent disability at 20%. The compensation was fixed for the partial permanent disablement at Rs. 12,833/-. The above amount was not paid as an amount of Rs. 17,356/- was paid towards the hospital leave salary during the period of treatment, relying on R. 39 of the Cochin Port Trust Employees Leave Regulation. Aggrieved by the above, the appellant filed an application before the Workmen's Compensation Court, Ernakulam under S. 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. The above application was taken to file as WCC No. 59/88. The Workmen's Compensation Court accepted the contention of the employer that an amount of Rs. 17,356/- was paid towards hospital leave salary, though he was eligible for an amount of Rs. 12,833/- only towards compensation and hence the workman was not entitled to any further compensation. Moreover, proceedings had been initiated to recover the amount exceeding the amount of Rs. 12,833/- fixed towards compensation and the application of the workman was dismissed. The above order is under challenge at the instance of the workman.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent.
3. It was the common case that the appellant sustained injury out of the course of his employment under the respondent and was on hospital leave for the period from 20.5.1986 to 31.12.1987. It was also admitted that the Chief Medical Officer of the Cochin Port Trust assessed the partial permanent disablement at 20%. While the appellant was undergoing treatment, he was paid Rs. 17,356/- towards hospital leave salary. Admittedly, the petitioner was entitled to Rs. 12,833/- towards compensation for the partial permanent disablement as a result of the accident. The dispute was regarding the appropriation of the above amount due towards compensation for the partial permanent disablement suffered by the appellant in the accident from the hospital leave salary allowed to him.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the amount of Rs. 12,833/- fixed under S.4(1)(c), was the compensation for the disablement he has suffered out of and in the course of the employment under the respondent, whereas the amount already paid was towards hospital leave salary which had nothing to do with the compensation for the partial permanent disablement. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in view of the proviso to sub-s. 2 of S.4 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the amount of compensation awarded was liable to be appropriated from the lumpsum or half of the monthly payment made to the workman. On a reading of the provisions under S.4 of the Act, the above argument advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent cannot be accepted.
5. S.4 of the Act deals with the amount of compensation payable to or to the legal representatives of the workman who happened to loose his life or suffer injuries. Clause (a) of sub-s. (1) deals with the case where death results from the injury. Clause (b) of sub-s. (1) deals with the compensation where permanent total disablement results from the injury. Clause (c) of sub-s. (1) deals with the case where partial permanent disablement is suffered due to the injury. Clause (d) of sub-s. 1 deals with the cases where temporary disablement whether total or partial results from the injury. So far as Clauses (a), (b) and (c) are concerned, the compensation is for the loss of life or permanent disablement caused as a result of the accident, whereas clause (d) deals with half monthly payment of the sum during the course of treatment or during the course of temporary disablement as a result of the injury. It would be profitable to extract clauses (a) to (d) of sub-s.(1) of S.4 of the Act, which read:
"4. Amount of compensation.
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the amount of compensation shall be as follows, namely:
(a) Where death results from the injury an amount equal to (fifty percent) of the monthly wages of the deceased workman multiplied by the relevant factor; or an amount of (fifty thousand rupees), whichever is more;
(b) Where permanent total disablement results from the injury an amount equal to (sixty percent) of the monthly wages of the injured workman multiplied by the relevant factor; or an amount of (sixty thousand rupees), whichever is more;
(c) Where permanent partial disablement results from the injury.
(i) in the case of an injury specified in Part II of Schedule I, such percentage of the compensation which would have been payable in the case of permanent total disablement as is specified therein as being the percentage of the loss of earning capacity caused by that injury, and
(ii) in the case of an injury not specified in Schedule I, such percentage of the compensation payable in the case of permanent total disablement as is proportionate to the loss of earning capacity (as assessed by the qualified medical practitioner) permanently caused by the injury;
(d) Where temporary disablement, whether total or partial results from the injury:
a half-monthly payment of the sum equivalent to twenty-five percent of monthly wages of the workman, to be paid in accordance with the provisions of sub-s. (2).
(2) The half-monthly payment referred to in clause (d) of sub-s.(1) shall be payable on the sixteenth day-
(i) from the date of disablement, where such disablement lasts for a period of twenty-eight days or more, or
(ii) after the expiry of a waiting period of three days from the date of disablement where such disablement lasts for a period of less than twenty-eight days; and thereafter half-monthly during the disablement or during a period of five years, whichever period if shorter:
6. Provided that-
(a) there shall be deducted from any lump sum or half-monthly payments to which the workman is entitled the amount of any payment or allowance which the workman has received from the employer by way of compensation during the period of disablement prior to the receipt of such lump sum or of the first half-monthly payment, as the case may be; and
(b) no half-monthly payment shall in any case exceed the amount, if any, by which half the amount of the monthly wages of the workman before the accident exceeds half the amount of such wages which he is earning after the accident".
7. A careful reading of the above provisions would reveal that clause (c) would relate to the compensation due to permanent partial disablement resulting from the injury, whereas clause (d) would relate to the compensation payable due to temporary disablement causing from the injury. As per clause (d), the injured would be entitled to the half-monthly payment of sum equivalent to a particular percentage of wages for the period during which the worker was temporarily disabled from attending to his duties. The sub-s.(2) prescribes the limit to which the injured would be entitled to compensation as per clause (d). As per the proviso to sub-s. (2), the amount of any payment or allowance received from the employer towards compensation should be appropriated from the lump sum compensation or from the half monthly payments. In fact, the compensation allowable as per clause (d) is in respect of the period during which the injured was on temporary disablement by which he could not attend to his duties whereas clause (c) deals with the compensation for the permanent partial disablement suffered by the injured as a result of the employment injury. In fact, clauses (b) and (c) of sub-s. 1 would entitle the injured to compensation for permanent disablement whereas clause (d) would entitle the worker for compensation for the period during which he could not attend to the duty due to temporary disablement as a result of the injury. Sub-s. (2) of S.4 would apply only to clause (d) of sub-s. 1 of S.4 and the embargo as per sub-s. (2) shall not apply to clause (a), (b) and (c) of sub-s. 1 of S.4. When a person suffers temporary disablement for some period and suffers partial permanent disability, he shall be entitled to compensation under S.4(1)(d) as well as (c). Compensation awarded are on different basis and one is not dependent on the other. The employee, who received compensation under clause (d) of sub-s. 1 for the period during which he could not attend to his duties due to temporary disablement as a result of the injury, is not debarred from claiming compensation for permanent partial disablement under clauses (c) or (b) and the compensation payable under the above two heads are entirely different and distinct. Hence, the compensation allowable under clause (c), namely the compensation for the permanent partial disablement suffered by the appellant in the course of his employment, as a result of the employment injury, has to be paid independent of the award of compensation under clause (d) of sub-s. 1. The procedure adopted by the Workmen's Compensation Court by appropriating the amount allowable to the appellant under clause (c) from the compensation awarded under clause (d) was quite contrary to law and as such the above order is liable to be set aside.
8. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The appellant shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 12,833/- towards compensation for the permanent partial disablement in addition to the amount of Rs. 17,356/- paid towards his hospital leave salary.