Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 680 (GAU)

Jahan Uddin v. Union of India

2019-05-30

SUMAN SHYAM

body2019
JUDGMENT : Suman Shyam, J. 1. Heard Mr. K.U. Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. M.R. Das, learned counsel representing the respondents. 2. The appellants herein are the legal heirs of Late Kamal Uddin who had died in an accident that occurred on 09-04-2001 while working as labouror under a sub-contractor engaged by a contractor working under the respondents. After the said incident, the appellants had approached the learned Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation, Kamrup at Guwahati seeking compensation for the death of Late Kamal Uddin by filing an application under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1923), which was registered as W.C. Case No. 134/2007. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties, the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation had passed the judgment and award dated 04-04-2013 awarding compensation in favour of the appellants. The operative part of the judgment and award dated 04-04-2013 in W.C. Case No. 134/2007 is quoted herein-below for ready reference: "In the light of the above discussion and decision the petitioner claimant Anowara Bewa, W/o Late Abdul Khaleque of Village Jiaguru (Bilashipara) in the district of Dhubri is awarded compensation of Rs. 2,60,292/- (Rupees two lakhs sixty thousand two hundred two hundred ninety two only) on account of death of her son Jainuddin in accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, O.P. No. 1 the Chief General Manager, Assam Telecom Circle, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Ulubari, Guwahati-7 is directed to deposit the said amount of compensation alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum thereon with the undersigned within 30 (Thirty) days from the date of receipt of the order for disbursement to the claimant." 4. The judgment and award dated 04-04-2013 was assailed by the respondents herein by filing MFA No. 69/2013 which was earlier disposed of by this Court by order dated 10-05-2019 by affirming the award dated 04.04.2013 passed by the learned Commissioner. The appellants being claimants had preferred this appeal on two grounds. Firstly, the funeral cost awarded by the learned Commissioner is less than the amount prescribed by the statute. Secondly, the interest in this case ought to have been awarded from the date of accident, which has not been granted by the learned Commissioner. The appellants being claimants had preferred this appeal on two grounds. Firstly, the funeral cost awarded by the learned Commissioner is less than the amount prescribed by the statute. Secondly, the interest in this case ought to have been awarded from the date of accident, which has not been granted by the learned Commissioner. By relying upon a judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Anu Biswas and Others vs. Owner & Managing Director and Others, 2018 (3) GLT 580, Mr. Ahmed submits that both the issues are settled in favour of the appellants herein by the aforesaid decision of this Court and therefore, the impugned award calls for suitable modification. 5. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the respondents submits that in terms of the award dated 04-04-2013, the respondents have already deposited the principal amount by a cheque on 14-06-2013, within the time permitted under the award and therefore, there can be no question of payment of any further interest in the matter. By citing precarious financial condition faced by his client, Mr. Das has also prayed for reduction of the rate of interest, in the event this Court considers it appropriate to allow the prayer made by the appellants. 6. I have considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the materials available on record. Considering the limited nature of grievance expressed by the appellants, as noticed above, it would not be necessary for this Court to embark on an elaborate discussion of the facts and circumstances of the case. The appeal preferred by the respondents against award dated 04-04-2013 has already been dismissed by the order dated 10-05-2019 passed by this Court. Therefore, in the present appeal, this Court is only concerned with the question as to whether funeral cost is required to be enhanced and if the interest is required to be awarded with effect from the date of accident. 7. By the amended Act No. 45 of 2009 carried out w.e.f. 18-01-2010 Section 4(4) of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 was amended thereby providing that in case of death, the funeral cost to be paid by the employer to the dependent of the deceased shall not be less than Rs. 5,000/-. Prior to the said amendment, the amount was fixed at Rs. 5,000/-. Prior to the said amendment, the amount was fixed at Rs. 2500/- and it appears that taking note of the pre-amended provision the learned Commissioner had awarded Rs. 2500/- as funeral cost. However, since the judgment and award dated 04-04- 2013 has been passed after the amendment of Section 4(4) of the Act of 1923, it is the amended provision which would be applicable to the present case. In other words, the appellants were entitled to receive Rs. 5,000/- as funeral cost. 8. In the case of Pratap Narain Singh Deo vs. Srinivas Sabata and Another, (1976) 1 SCC 289 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that an employer becomes liable to pay compensation as soon as a personal injury cause to the workman by the accident arising out of and in course of his employment. In the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Siby George, (2012) 12 SCC 540 , the Supreme Court had affirmed the interest awarded by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation @ 12% per annum from the date of accident. 9. A question of similar nature had arisen for consideration by this Court in the case of Anu Biswas (Supra). By taking note of the law laid down by the Supreme Court as well as the amendments carried out to Section 4(4) of the Act of 1923, the learned Single Judge had made the following observations: "10. In view of the aforesaid judgments, the learned Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation manifestly fell into error in not awarding interest @ 12% from the date of the accident. Therefore, the respondent No. 1 will be liable to pay interest from the date of accident, which is on 18.09.2006, @ 12% per annum till 27.02.2013 when the cheque was deposited for payment to the appellants herein. Such payment shall be made within a period of 3(three) months from today, failing which it will continue to accrue interest @ 12% per annum. 11. So far as the funeral cost is concerned, it is not in dispute that at the relevant point of time when the accident had occurred, a sum of Rs. 2,500/- was payable by the employer. Subsequently, as noticed earlier, the amount of Rs. 2,500/- was enhanced to not less than Rs. 5,000/- by Act 45 of 2009 with effect from 18.01.2010. 12. 2,500/- was payable by the employer. Subsequently, as noticed earlier, the amount of Rs. 2,500/- was enhanced to not less than Rs. 5,000/- by Act 45 of 2009 with effect from 18.01.2010. 12. If the funeral cost was paid immediately after the occurrence, there would have been no occasion for enhancement of the amount to Rs. 5,000/- on the ground that the judgment came to be passed after the amendment had taken place. But as the aforesaid amount of Rs. 2,500/- was not paid and as by the time the judgment came to be pronounced, the amount of funeral cost had been enhanced, I am of the considered opinion that the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 being a beneficial piece of legislation, the appellants cannot be deprived of the enhanced amount towards funeral cost." 10. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that there is no scope for this Court to take a different view in the matter. Therefore, the funeral cost awarded by the learned Commissioner is enhanced to Rs. 5000/- and the differential amount of Rs. 2500/- shall now be paid by the respondent to the appellant. Similarly, interest would be paid on the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Commissioner with effect from the date of accident till 14-06-2013, i.e. the date on which the cheque was deposited by the respondents. 11. However, taking note of the facts and circumstances of this case as well as the submission of Mr. Das, it is provided that the amount of interest to be paid to the appellants with effect from the date of accident till 14-06-2013 shall be calculated @ 9% per annum in simple interest. The amount found due and payable to the appellant be paid to them within a period 03 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 12. With the above observation, this appeal stands disposed of.