S KUMARASWAMY Vs. RAMU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is preferred by the owner and the insurance company to challenge the award dated 18. 3. 1997 in case No. WCA 23 of 1993 passed by the workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Mysore District, Mysore. In passing the said award, the said Workmen's Compensation Commissioner awarded a sum of Rs. 97,320 payable by the appellants herein to the respondent-claimant together with interest at 6 per cent and further penalty of Rs. 20,000 payable by the appellant No. 1, owner.

(2.) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Mr. S. P. Shankar had taken me through the impugned award passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Mysore District, Mysore, henceforth in brief referred to as 'the WCC'. It was argued by him that though the medical evidence had reflected that the respondent-claimant had suffered overall bodily disability of 15 per cent he had fixed the disability in the matter of earning capacity of the respondent-claimant to an extent of 100 per cent. While taking me through the evidence adduced by the respondent-claimant, very well adverted to in pages 6 and 7 of the impugned order, Mr. Shankar submitted that the awarding of compensation of Rs. 97,320 together with interest was totally disproportionate to the disability the respondent-claimant had suffered. According to him, the WCC would have fixed the compensation in between 20 per cent and 50 per cent and not beyond. He had also pointed out that the award was in total negation of the provision in section 4 (1) (c) (ii) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, henceforth in brief, 'the WC Act' and that being the position, according to him, there is a question of law involved in the instant appeal.

(3.) NEXTLY, for and on behalf of the appellant No. 1, owner, Mr. S. P. Shankar had also argued that there was no good reason for the WCC to award penalty of rs. 20,000 on the appellant No. 1, owner as he was not put to notice before passing that order on him as contemplated under the proviso below 4-A (3) (b ).