:-
MvA.mo.1''554ro5
!N'!'.|-L..'- r.:c,.I... .. . . _. . __ .. ._
him In Lu\|uI|_.n m Lauu II |L1lV|\2.(\"|.'.'~~,n.|.r|nI -I
1 I111: HUI.' Dun lVll\D.uUD|1\_l.'.: ~:gv|.n|IuU
mum :u\AH|)I |.\ um: I: nLv|\L1\i.i..A|s411 a |u1L'z"._j.:l lYn\.'lt'i £11.! .
A ~ \|_| H I": |Vj_")'"
{cnfipuun
an In; A i'.vqJr\" -I fli.|A
xxggjjnni
BY ITS BRAbIC'iH" MA--NA~GER_ '
P.B.No.1o3,13.M;;RoAfi;» '
HASSAN .... "
NOW Ri$PRESEN'i"k3--L)_BY --
rrs DEPUfl'Y' .MANAG-ER.
M /s. UNITED 1%ND:AIr4sU_RANcE c:o.1:rD.,
REGIONALO-FFICE, ._
tsANc?m.--s.oRr:.' ~ r APPELLANI'
f 'V " .A(1;3Y' S Rl.1ix..M.V};3NKM'ES'HV. ADV.)
1;. 'B';N.:§A<§;§;;<é;jV s/0 BASAVEGOWDA
MAJGR, ,2/0 NILAGVAGILU
KORATAGERE POST,
AA jARKAV_L.'AGUD'1'ALUK.,.
_ 1§i:_3.vr1'1'A1. s/0 M.'l'.SRlKAN'l'AlAH
. 'lu1'AJOR, R/O NILAVAGILU
E KORATAGERE POST
T DQDDAMAGGE HQBL-1
ARKALGUD TALUK
HASSAN DlS'l'RlC'l'. RESPONDENTS
THIS APPEAL as FlLED u/s. 30 (1) or’ ‘1’r1.l:?.’4′.V;;–fA*’i*.
AGAENST ORDER DATE 12-.”.1’J.2%4 _P.’a..n.«””‘-“”‘V».-_’§’.l–‘.. V’ -‘E!\!’ _
No.wcA. NF’. sn. 106/O1 on THE FILE on’ THE LABOUR ‘OFFICER
AND FOR “vv’0i1″:dv’1i-3i’1″‘c’» -3-‘5».E_”‘i~=’_i’:’.%’~%a”.p%’.’!’x’«l’.’;’€.’~N, -,
HASSAN, AWARDING COMPENSATlO–N”‘0F’ RS.3,58;7.S?3/V-vWjlTI~i
INTEREST’ AT’ 12% RA. AFTER 30 DAYSAAFROM ‘THE BATE HJF
Acclmml’ ‘PILL msvosn’ 85 n1ls1_;L.e;”1+:{‘
HEREIN To DEPOSIT
‘ms APPEAL comm; “As, ”
MAN.n.I1.A CHELLUR, J. DELlVERED.’l’HE FoLLQw’1NG:;
1 ii
Heard ffii*.v.i:iii§:V appeflant and so
according to the appellant
insurer Nagaraj was workmg’ as a
cleaner iniufiielipasseiageirs vehicle and therefore. he was not
driaier who siiistalnei ‘ d injuries in the mold’ ent in
Vques£=§?érL” far as the of accident on
is Basavegowda sustaining injuries in the said accideit,
from death of some passengers and injuries
sustained by other passengers, is not in dispute.
According to the appellant, cleaner is not covered under
MFA.N0.l 554105
the Policy between the owner and the irnsm-ance’__C*ie§.peii§r,_ _
Therefore, there is no liability so fares as
concerned to indemnify the owiierlby
to the injured claimant. ‘l’hc_t’wo >
which the appellant relies to fiontention
§$’
E3
a alien-ed to .”;;ev’e_ .’..–,1.-..~:.:; ;su-,i.nLtted by the owner
after the accident,_ ;–:’-it-=.-e -«+..a:;e-J. that
he was document is one
;___to ‘heenvifgiven by the claimant
Nagaraj to the mistake regarding his
l.J.l3I.t-‘NV: gene …b..-eugh t..-.. – Jcords. We notice that
» aforesaid documents on wi*'”-h the ‘*”p..°-.’u’n’a.nt pia-.ces
H ~.relianceV”‘_Were”not even marked before the Commissioner.
‘1’hiet the document was not even confronted to the
” Nagaraj to clarify whether he had given such
iiiecleciaration or affidavit. “he learned counsel for the
” epmuan. e….t..s th..t these documents came to the hands
of the appeiiant through ttw Police. if this is part of t.-..
_A…:I_
records of the criminal case before the Police, deuaus
“n|n~irn fnfi’
£5
MFA.N0.l554f05
document came to the custody of
forthcoming. There is nothing ahoiviv”
document was part of ch.arg_e«…_sheet- *
production of documents will case of the
appellant and even if doeainentswere the
of those accordance with
b}vidence__VA:vct._V ii:-.’l.ia_: above, when said alleged
declaréi_tiul\’ Court, the appellant was
not document and the owner of
the_’yehicle is” examined by the appellant regarding
Iindnr .
:1 Han ‘n’n ‘I ‘II! n flip An
\I \II ELI-\I IIHJIDI
nan
iii; undeiitiiese circumstarmes, the Commissioner for
Wo1*;lcmerr’a«9Compensation was justified in considering the
it case of claimant based on the available evidence. The
A’ gjrayer of the learned counsel for the appellant to remand
‘V matter back to the authority concerned arises,
hg nnpgll nt ca met be allow-egl_ $9 fill ran the
C-nu-II:-Q0 -I C: IIIIJI-I Call’ ‘Or lllv-I-‘I
— J. 4.I__ __I.£_.._…_ …_… AL. ……A. -1′ 5|..-
1 1
L116 fit
1.1′!
MFA.N0. 1 554105
. Learned counsel for
notice the latest law regmtiing ec_ietcV w
interest is payable in an case of
National Insurance III. Jlubaatr
T? 3 Ca’ 3T”
Ahmad algfl _4_I;___!_:_ln_d_ag- -En
——- -:-v-vww www I-r ‘..–gr: TTCHA -ID
V –Am nnw 125::
“h’r’i1″1 ‘t pésjragiiepinyéi, it is heiti as tiiitier:
5.9.”»-lrsgterest isjs.-uyable gander Section 4–A(3)
“”” .§f’j- dqfaait in paying the
_ .co:npensation”due this Act within one
_. date it feii .-:.”.:e. The
‘ ‘questions of under Section 4-}! was
“nieait w_ith.by… Court in Ilefaghar Singh 0.
}Singh (1998 SOC By
14 of 1995, Section 4-}! of
V the Act was o..rnen.ded., inter reiirz. _f’.’.=cin,r,.r the
‘ ‘_’mir’uv’nrum rate of interest to be simple
interest @ 12%. in the instant case, the
‘7cioci:ident took place after the amendment
‘ therefore, the rate of 12% asfixed by
the High Court cannot be faulted. But the
period as fixed by it is wrong. The starting
,9 int he on wfiietiea sf ene rruenthflfl-‘en the
date on which it fell due. Obviously it
cannot be the date of anemia’ ‘ nt. Since no
indication is there as when it becomes due,
ithastobetakentobethedateof
of the claim ‘!’.h..is o.:.=,oea..frs to
be so because Section 4-An) prescribes that
_. __’._l
wrr,-firs-c*at'”n ianrier Section 4 shaii be paw
MFA.N0.l.’554l05
as snn as it fatts due. The oo:”:u,7?r€:?”s.-?c*zti€itt— *’
becomes due on the basis of adjudicatiarVt’Vof
the claim made. The .
Section 4 in some ”
assessment of loss of V ”
q~.:a!g’,*I’.’ed mec.=”:’o.~.!_ pmctiriifir-ea ”
adjudication _ “—-(;ione,”v. of
compensation becomifug. due cfoeso not
The position bemntgs’-olearer on «av reading
of sub-section {2} of-. Seéztion 40′-“Ag” It
provides t.h_r.t j§2§.?;!:,-*!!’.e!-.t to the
extent of admitted to be made
when'<3fi'q:'£cy§;er fiat eject;-_;iit"the
jbt.v:mn{xensation.to me claimed. The
Wlression if; . is V 'falls due'.
€Sig;riificdntly;"'»iegisIcttur¢ has not used the
exgntession 3 'ffibm of accident'.
Lfinices if .'f""'**' '
l'lflJ'l'\n'
tttt 'V is £5: "…€,'-….–'*£……'-"*:'s::, t.'-.2
._ falling due does not
V
6. in t j1_1_(_i_2mc
c,_ __t. of the Ap¢:=__ .._I_I_.,
r’*=g_V'”*:’-.i1′”‘ th::–..d”w &”m Wi”ch “1”‘r’-t to be payabie in a
respondent claimant is entitled for
intérest..”aW0irded by the Commissioner from one
month the date of adjudication i.e., 12.10.2004.
'--3 MFA.N0.l554l05 ill nruanl in allnua-ad iii "
of payment of interest by the appgljgmt dthef ” ”
terms of the award remained