N A K PATHAN Vs. JULEKHABI PATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the employer is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23-9-1983, made by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Hubli, in WCA/ SR. 44/1982, on his file, awarding a compensation of Rs. 18,000/- to the mother of the deceased-workman under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (shortly called the 'Act'), The Commissioner also granted, under Section 4A(3) of the Act interest at 6 per cent per annum and a penalty of 10% of the amount awarded. In this appeal appellant does not question the quantification of the compensation. What is, however, assailed is the award of interest and penalty. Claimant-1st respondent has preferred cross-objections seeking enhancement of the penalty. There having been some delay in filing the cross-objections the claimant has filed I.A.I for condonation of that delay. In the circumstances stated, we allow I.A.I. and condone the delay in the filing of the cross-objections.

(2.) The proceedings arose in the context of the death of a certain Firojkhan Khadarkhan Pathan, who was employed by the appellant as a driver of the vehicle MEW 4252. On 2-9-1979 while he was so working, in an accident arising out of and in the course of employment, he was seriously injured. He succumbed to the injuries on the following day i.e., 3-9-1979 at the K.M.C. Hospital, Hubli. Appellant did not deposit the compensation in terms of the provisions of the Act. After service of notice of the proceedings to the insurer, the latter deposited the amount before the Commissioner only on 14-3-1983. The insurer had been notified of the proceedings as long back as the year 1980.

(3.) The contention of Sri S.K. Joshi is that Section 4A(3) being in the nature of a penal-provision, the Commissioner had, first to adjudicate upon the claim for compensation and if, in the course of that adjudication, he found that there, was in his opinion, a case for initiation of proceedings for levy of interest and of penalty under Section 4A, he should then issue a show-cause notice and arrive at a decision in the matter after hearing the employer and after considering the cause shown against the levy. Sri Joshi contends that this procedure not having been followed in the present-case the award of interest and penalty are rendered infirm in law. This, according to the learned Counsel, is the substantial question of law arising in the appeal.