IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM MFA.No. 152 of 2006() 1. SIVADASAN, S/O.PAPPAN, ... Petitioner Vs 1. VASANTHY SUDHAKARAN, ... Respondent 2. MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., For Petitioner :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU For Respondent :SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR Dated :05/03/2009 O R D E R R.BASANT & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------ M.F.A No.152 of 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT
BASANT, J.
Claimant before the Commissioner for Workmen’s
Compensation is the appellant before us. He claimed
compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. He is a
car driver by profession. He was aged 29 years at the time of his
accident. He claimed to earn an income of Rs.3,000/- per
mensem. The accident took place on 01.12.1992. The
Commissioner accepted the claim, but reckoned his monthly
income only at Rs.1,000/- per mensem. Physical disability was
ascertained and determined by a qualified medical practitioner
examined as AW2 at 5%. But the doctor opined that reduction in
earning capacity is 15%. The Commissioner after perusing the
certificate and the oral evidence of AW2, came to the conclusion
that reduction in earning capacity can be reckoned only at 12%.
The monthly income, the Commissioner held, can be reckoned
only at Rs.1,000/-. Accordingly compensation was worked out
and it was held that the appellant is entitled for an amount of
M.F.A No.152 of 2006 2
Rs.12,595.20 as compensation. A direction was issued to pay
interest @ 12% per annum. It was directed that such payment
need be made only from the date of the application, ie.
27.06.2000. The accident had allegedly taken place on
01.12.1992.
2. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned
award. An appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen’s
Compensation Act is maintainable only if a substantial question
of law arises for consideration in the appeal. The learned
counsel for the appellant contends that the Commissioner erred
on 3 aspects in reckoning Rs.1,000/- as the monthly income, 12%
as the reduction in earning capacity and in directing payment of
interest only from the date of the application and not the date of
the accident. Under Section 4A of the Act, compensation is
liable to be paid within one month from the date it falls due. It is
trite now after the decision in National Insurance Co.Ltd. v.
Mubasir Ahmed [2007(3) KLT 26 (SC)] that such amount is to
be paid from the date of adjudication. The date of the award
must certainly relate back to the date of the petition and
therefore the only question will be whether interest is payable
with effect from the date of the petition or the date of the
M.F.A No.152 of 2006 3
accident. In a case like the instant one where the appellant was
at default for not filing the claim within time, we are not
persuaded to agree that any such crucial error in law has been
committed by the Commissioner in directing payment of interest
from the date of the petition. We are not, in these
circumstances, satisfied that any such substantial question of law
arises or even that any error has been committed by the
Commissioner to justify invocation of the appellate jurisdiction
under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
3. This appeal is, in these circumstances, dismissed.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
(C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)
rtr/-