Judgment 1. 2nd respondent – Insurance Company in KPK/G No.15/2008 on the file of Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Chikkaballapur, has come up in this appeal impugning the Judgment and Order dated 09.09.2009 passed therein. 2. The grounds of appeal is restricted to rejection of Joint Memo filed by the parties on 26.02.2009 and thereafter proceed with the Claim Petition and awarding compensation in excess of entitlement of claimant. Admittedly the Claim Petition was filed by the first respondent herein claiming that he has suffered fracture of clavicle and ribs in an employment accident said to have taken place on 31.01.2005 involving lorry bearing No.KA-07/4242 belonging to second respondent herein and insured with the appellant. The accident is not in dispute, so also the injuries suffered by claimant in the said accident. 3. In the proceedings before the Commissioner it is seen that a Joint Memo is filed on 26.06.2009 wherein the parties, i.e., claimant Murthy @ Narasimha Murthy and 2nd respondent, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited entered into a settlement, wherein claimant Narasimha Murthy agreed to receive a sum of Rs.78,000/- without interest in full and final settlement against the respondents, owner and insurer of offending lorry. It is seen that the said memo was filed into the Court of Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Chikkaballapur on 26.02.2009 itself as could be seen from the records which is made available to this Court. Subsequently the matter got adjourned to 12.03.2009, 25.03.2009, 20.05.2009, 27.05.2009, on which day parties were called upon to file their objections, if any to the Joint Memo and adjourned to 10.06.2009 and against adjourned to 17.06.2009. On that day, the Commissioner by herself decided that the settlement arrived at between the parties is erroneous compared to the evidence of the doctor in the said proceedings to the effect that the claimant has suffered limb disability at 35%, therefore compensation amount agreed between the parties at Rs.78,000/- is on lower side and accordingly rejected the said memo and proceeded to allow the claim petition awarding compensation in a sum of Rs.3,16,462/- payable with interest at 12% p.a., from the thirtieth day of accident till deposit. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. 4. On going through the same, the only substantial question of law that arise for consideration is as under: 1. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. 4. On going through the same, the only substantial question of law that arise for consideration is as under: 1. Whether the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Chikkaballapur, was justified in rejecting the Joint Memo duly signed by both the parties and countersigned by their respective counsel could be rejected suo-motu without there being any objections by the parties to execution and presentation of the said Joint Memo? 5. Heard the counsel for appellant and as well as first respondent. Perused the Judgment impugned. What is to be decided in this appeal is the limited question of scope of Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation. The parties to the proceedings mutually agreed and accepted on a particular sum to be paid by the respondents and to be received by claimant as compensation for the injuries suffered in the employment accident. In the present proceedings, admittedly the injuries suffered by claimant is fracture of clavicle and ribs. The opinion of the doctor, who has given evidence to the effect that the claimant has suffered limb disability at 35%. If the same is taken to whole body, disability would come to 12%. Assuming for a moment, the wages of claimant is taken at Rs.3,500/- as it is taken by the Commissioner and relevant factor of 215.28 is applied, the claimant is entitled to the compensation as under: 3,500/-x 60 = 2,100/- x 12 = 252x215.28 = Rs.54,250-56 payable along with interest as applicable on the date when the settlement so arrived at between the parties on 26.02.2009. 6. Surprisingly the Commissioner has overstepped her limit in this case. When time and again the Apex Court and this Court repeatedly encouraging out of Court settlement between the parties and by following the dictum of this Court and Apex Court, when the parties files Joint Memo and thereafter does not tender any objection for the Joint Memo, the conduct of the Commissioner in rejecting the same and thereafter assessing compensation suo moto is unknown to the principles governing awarding of compensation in Workmen’s Compensation cases namely taking loss of earning capacity doubling the percentage of disability advised by the doctor. As could be seen in this case, the Commissioner has taken disability at 70% as against the opinion of the doctor that there is 35% disability to a particular limb and awarding compensation in a sum of Rs.3,16,462/- which does not stand to reason in any manner. 7. There appears to be something fishy in the manner in which compensation is assessed. It is clearly seen that the said finding of the Commissioner is neither supported by the facts nor the evidence available on record to enable her to award such princely sum of compensation, which is totally disproportionate to the injuries suffered by the claimant and moreover when the parties have entered into a settlement for a reasonable compensation, which is more than what the claimant legitimately entitled to secure as on that day, the decision of the Commissioner in rejecting the said Joint Memo filed by the parties and awarding compensation excessively in the autocratic manner is totally erroneous, in fact her conduct in ignoring the provisions of Section 89 of CPC, wherein in all litigation even before the issues are framed and the matters are decided on merit, the parties are called upon to negotiate and settle the dispute amicably for the convenient of both parties. When that is being implemented by the parties, the Commissioner with audacity known to herself, has the impudence to reject the same and to award he compensation several times more than what the claimant is entitled. It clearly indicate that the intention of the Commissioner in awarding compensation in the aforesaid manner is neither in exercise of her power as provided under the provisions of the said Act nor stand to equity. 8. In that view of the matter, this Court partly allow the appeal filed by the Insurance Company. Consequently set aside the Judgment and Order dated 09.09.2009 and on the contrary hold that the claimant herein would be entitled to receive compensation in a sum of Rs.78,000/- as he had agreed to receive on 26.02.2009. Sofaras interest portion is concerned, i.e., interest at 12% p.a., from 30th day of accident to this day, the claimant is entitled to receive the same from the Commissioner, who has unnecessarily meddled with the Joint Memo and went to the extent of passing the Judgment where she was not required to do so. Sofaras interest portion is concerned, i.e., interest at 12% p.a., from 30th day of accident to this day, the claimant is entitled to receive the same from the Commissioner, who has unnecessarily meddled with the Joint Memo and went to the extent of passing the Judgment where she was not required to do so. In that view of the matter, claimant would be entitled to interest at 12% p.a., from 26.02.2009 till this day, payable by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, viz., Smt. Vinutha N. 9. The Registrar (Judicial) is directed to send a copy of this Judgment to the Principal Secretary, Labour Department and also to the Labour Commissioner to enable them to find out in which place the Presiding Officer, Smt. Vinutha, N., who was presiding the Court of Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Chikkaballapur, as on 09.09.2009 is presently working and to hold an enquiry regarding her conduct and to recover interest portion from her salary and remit the same to this Court for disbursement of the same to claimant, within six months from the date of receipt of copy of this Judgment. In view of appeal is filed by Insurance Company being allowed in part in the aforesaid manner, from out of the amount in deposit, a sum of Rs.78,000/- is ordered to be deducted and send to the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Chikkaballapur, for disbursement of the same to claimant and the excess amount in deposit is ordered to be released in favour of the Insurance Company.