Sivadasan vs Vasanthy Sudhakaran on 5 March, 2009

0
47
Kerala High Court
Sivadasan vs Vasanthy Sudhakaran on 5 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  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/-

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *