UMESH VEERABHADRAPPA MOOLIMANI Vs. VIJAY SHIVANAND TUBACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Workmen Compensation Commissioner awarded compensation and also directed penalty of 30% of the compensation amount to be payable by the owner of the vehicle. The para 36 of the judgment deals with the liability of the penalty imposed on the appellant-owner. The commissioner observes that the appellant-owner is a lawyer and conscious of the liability under workmen Compensation Act yet did not deposit the compensation as per the Workmen compensation Act, therefore, slapped penalty of 30% of the compensation amount.

(2.) PER contra, the Learned Counsel for the appellant argued that immediately after the accident. The appellant has paid Rs. 20,000/-to the claimant to meet the immediate needs and that there was no intention on the part of the appellant to avoid liability.

(3.) THE following substantial question of law arises for consideration: whether the finding of the Workmen Compensation Commissioner that the employer being a lawyer has defaulted to deposit the amount as per law, for that reason, whether imposition of penalty of 30% of the compensation is perversely contrary to law and evidence on record?