Summary
Under Section 2(i)(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923,"total disablement" means such disablement, whether of a temporary or Permanent nature, as incapacitates a workmen for all work which he was capable of per forming at the time of time ocident resulting in such disablement.
Under s. 4A(3), when an employer defaults in paying the compensation within one month from the date it fell due, the Commissioner may direct payment of penalty and interest if he is of the opinion that there was no justification for the employer's delay.The Commissioner, in the present case, awarded compensation, holding that the respondent was a carpenter by profession, that he suffered an injury by an accident which arose out of and in the course of his employment with the appellant, that it resulted in the amputation of his left arm from above the elbow, that in consequence he had become unfit for the work of carpenter as carpentery cannot be carried on with one hand only, and that, therefore, the respondent had lost 100% of his earning capacity, that is, that he suffered total disablement. He also ordered the payment of penalty under s. 4A(3) together with interest at 6 per cent per annum.The appellant's writ petition to the High Court challenging the order was dismissed. In appeal to this Court, it was contended, (1) that the amputation was of the nature referred to in item 3 of Part II of Sch. I of the Act and must therefore be deemed to have resulted only in permanent partial disablement, and (2) that the Commissioner erred in imposing a penalty, as com pensation had not fallen due until it was settled by the Commissioner under s. 19.Dismissing the appeal.^HELD: (1) The finding of the Commissioner that there was total disablement was correct. The argument with reference to item 3 of Part II of Sch I was a new case which could not be allowed to be raised by the appellant because the facts relied on had not been admitted or established.[874G-H](2) The Commissioner was fully justified in ordering the Payment of penalty and interest. [875A](a) Section 3(1) of the Act provides that an employer shall be liable to pay compensation if personal injury is caused to a workman by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. Therefore under s. 4A(1) it was the duty of the appellant to pay the compensation at the rate provided in s. 4, as soon as the personal injury was caused to the respondent. Not only did the appellant not do so or even make a provisional payment under s. 4A(2), he took the false pleas that the respondent was a casual contractor and that the accident was caused solely by the respondent's own negligence, and raised frivolous objections before the Commissioner that he had no jurisdiction and even prevailed on the respondent to file a memorandum of agreement settling the claim at a grossly inadequate sum. He was therefore liable to pay the penalty and the interest.[875B, E-H](b) There is nothing in s. 10-which provides that if any question arises in any proceeding under the Act as to the liability of any person to pay company on or as to the amount or duration of the compensation it shall, in default 873of agreement, be settled by the Commissioner-to justify the argument that appellant's liability to pay compensation was suspended until after the settlement under s. 19. [815-CE]See the full content of this document
Extract
Pratap Narain Singh Deo VS. Srinivas Sabata And Anr.
PETITIONER: PRATAP NARAIN SINGH DEO Vs.RESPONDENT: SRINIVAS SABATA AND ANR.DATE OF JUDGMENT04/12/1975BENCH: SHINGAL, P.N.BENCH: SHINGAL, P.N.RAY, A.N. (CJ)BEG, M. HAMEEDULLAHSARKARIA, RANJIT SINGHCITATION: 1976 AIR 222 1976 SCR (2) 872 1976 SCC (1) 289ACT: Workmens Compensation Act (8 of 1923) ss. 2 (i)(1) 44 and 19 and item 3 of Part II of Sch. I-Scope of.JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1536 of 1970.Appeal by...
See the full content of this document