BRANCH MANAGER Vs. MAKRANI NURMOHMED DOSTMOHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Central Bank of India, which is 'State' or instrumentality of 'State' or an agency of the 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, has tried to make an attempt to deny and deprive or to see that a poor employee may not get the compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for the permanent partial disablement resulted in an injury caused in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. It is not in dispute that whatever may be the defence taken by the Bank and whether the defence taken by it is reasonable or not, the appellant No.2 is its own officer and he is also a party to the proceedings in the claim application filed by the employee, the respondent No.1 herein. Moreover, when the vehicle is insured by insurance company and the insurance company has undertaken an obligation to indemnify the owner of the vehicle for any compensation to be paid to the employee for the injury for the permanent partial disablement caused to him as a result of accident arising out of and in the course of employment, still the Bank has taken such a technical plea to defeat just and equitable claim of compensation of the employee. This approach apparently has been adopted merely to save itself from the amount of the additional compensation awarded to the employee for delayed payment of compensation by the employer by way of penalty. It is true that the amount of compensation awarded by the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 by way of penalty is not a liability of the insurance company to be indemnified to the owner but that does not mean that 'State' or instrumentality of 'State' or an agency of 'State' under Article 12 of the Constitution of India should have gone to the extent of filing of Appeal to defeat just and equitable claim of the employee rather than to pay this amount and if it was really an agreement in between its officer and the Bank, to realize this amount from the officer. Be that as it may.

(2.) This first appeal by the appellants, original opponents, in Workmen's Compensation, Old Case NO.41/89, New Case No.18/93 is directed against the award of the Labour Court Jamnagar and Ex-Officio Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Jamnagar decided on 20-2-1997 passed in the aforesaid case. Under the impugned award, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Jamnagar ordered United India Insurance Company Ltd., Jamnagar to pay Rs.24542-37 together with interest thereon at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of accident till the date of payment thereof to the claimant-applicant respondent No.1 as compensation for disability sustained by him in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with the appellants. The Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation, Jamnagar directed the Central Bank of India, the appellant No.1, to pay Rs.12271-18 with simple interest at the rate of 6% on the same from the date of accident till the date of realisation as penalty, to the workman.

(3.) This appeal is directed by the appellants against that part of the award of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Jamnagar under which the bank was ordered to pay to the workman Rs.12271-18 as penalty together with interest thereon at the rate of 6% from the date of accident till the date of payment thereof.