Bombay High Court
Divisional Manager, United India ... vs Sahah Bahadur And Anr. on 28 March, 1995
Equivalent citations: 1996ACJ558
JUDGMENT A.A. Desai, J.
1. On 25.6.1988 near Mouda, respondent No. 1, Sahah Bahadur, driver of a truck owned by respondent No. 2, met with an accident. Consequently, he suffered disability which is assessed to the extent of 60 per cent. The Tribunal in a claim petition awarded compensation of Rs. 99,720/-. The Tribunal further awarded penalty to the extent of 50 per cent and interest at the rate of 6 per cent. The insurance company, therefore, came in appeal.
2. According to Mr. V.L. Somalwar, the insurance company is not liable to pay the amount of penalty and interest which was owing to the default of the employer. In support, he placed reliance on a decision in Gautam Transport v. Jiluben Huseinbhai 1989 ACJ 587 (Gujarat).
3. Mr. S.K. Masjid, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1, injured, tried to support the order. He placed reliance on a decision in Khirod Nayak v. Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and contended that even the amount of penalty and interest is liable to be paid by the insurance company. As such, in the submission of Mr. Masjid, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, the impugned award does not warrant any interference. Peculiar feature of this case is that the employer, respondent No. 2, did not appear before the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation. He did not file any written statement. Thus, he has failed to offer any explanation for the delay or default. Even in this appeal, the employer, respondent No. 2, did not appear though served. I, therefore, do not propose to entertain argument as advanced on behalf of the respondent No. 1 by the learned counsel. Having regard to the set of circumstances, the employer, namely, the respondent No. 2 is liable to pay the amount of penalty and interest as awarded by the Tribunal.
4. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The award as passed is hereby confirmed, only with modification that the amount of penalty and interest shall be recovered by the injured workman from respondent No. 2, owner of the vehicle. No order as to costs.