Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed against the Judgement and Decree dated 7.3.2005 made in WC.Nos.184/2004 by the learned Deputy Labour Commissioner I (Commissioner for Workmen's compensation I) Chennai-6 by the claimant and the Insurance Company respectively.

2. The Appellant in CMA.No.1714/2005, while working as the driver of the lorry belonging to the 1st Respondent in CMA.No.1714/2005, which was insured with the 2nd Respondent in CMA.No.1714/2005/appellant in CMA.No.1719/2005, suffered injuries in an accident that occurred on 1.12.2003 at about 1.30 p.m. So, he filed an application under the Workmen Compensation Act 1923 (for short 'the Act') seeking compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- from the Respondents. 1st Respondent remained exparte. The 2nd Respondent Insurance Company filed its counter contesting the claim. In support of his case, the Appellant/claimant examined himself as PW.1 and examined the Doctor who assessed the disability suffered by the claimant as PW.2 and marked Exs.P1 to P14. On the side of the Insurance Company, RW.1 was examined and the disability certificate issued by the Doctor was marked as Ex.R1 with objection, as the Doctor, who issued the said certificate, was not examined.

28. For the reasons stated above, the appeal in CMA.No.1714/2005 filed by the claimant succeeds and the appeal in CMA.No.1719/2005 filed by the Insurance Company fails. The Appellant is entitled to the compensation of Rs.5,20,584/-. It is held that the Appellant Insurance Company would be liable to pay interest on compensation of Rs.5,20,584/- as contemplated under Section 4A(3)(a) of the Act from the date of the accident, more particularly, on completion of one month from the date of the accident. Accordingly, the appeal in CMA.No.1714/2005 filed by the claimant is allowed and the appeal in CMA.N0.1719/2005 filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.