MADAN GOPAL Vs. ANANDI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three appeals raise a common question of law and they can be decided by this common judgment. For proper appreciation of the controversy, the facts of S. B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 10 of 1990 Madan Gopal and Ors. v. Anandi Lal are taken into consideration.

(2.) MADAN Gopal and Smt. Pana Devi -the dependants of the deceased Balu Ram filed a claim petition under Section 19 of the Workmen's Compensation Act before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Bikaner. The case of the claimant-dependant was that on May 30, 1985, at about 4. 15 p. m. Uma Shanker, the son of the petitioners who was employed as the Conductor in bus No. RRG 3891, died during the course of his employment while he was on duty. It was averred in the claim petition that at the relevant time, the deceased was drawing the salary of Rs. 600/- per month and an extra allowance of Rs. 5/-per day. His total income was, thus, Rs. 750/-per month and at the time of his death, he was 20 years of age. It was, also averred that a notice regarding the death was given to the non-applicant No. 1 and the bus, at the relevant time, was insured with the defendant No. 2 the National Insurance Company Limited, Sikar. The claimant-dependants, therefore, claimed an amount of Rs. 67,200/-as compensation. The claimants further averred in the claim petition that they asked the non-applicants to pay the amount of compensation but they did not pay any heed to it and, therefore, they are entitled for interest @ 12% per annum as well as 50% penalty, on the claim amount. The notice of this claim petition was served on the non-applicants, but in spite of that notice, no amount was paid to the claimants. The non-applicant No. 1, i. e. , Anandi Lal (the owner of the bus) admitted the claim of the claimant-dependants and took a stand that the bus No. RRG 3891 was insured with the defendant No. 2 M/s. National Insurance Company and, therefore, the insurer is liable to make the payment of the amount of compensation. The defendant No. 2, the National Insurance Company contested the claim petition filed by the claimants and averred that the deceased Uma Shanker was neither in the employment of Anandi Lal nor he was working as a Conductor and the claim petition has been filed in collusion with the non-applicant No. 1. The question of jurisdiction of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner for the maintenance of the claim petition was also raised. The learned Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, after trial, awarded the compensation amounting to Rs. 67,200/-but refused to grant the interest on this amount. He, also, refused to levy the penalty. It is against this award dated October 5, 1989, passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner not levying penalty and interest that the present appeals have been filed by the appellant-claimants.

(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.