Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Deen Mohmad alias Tshaq Khan & Ors.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2143 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:22.09.2010. Oriental Insurance Company Limited ...Appellant Deen Mohmad alias Tshaq Khan and others ...Respondents Versus CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Vinod Chaudhri, Advocate, for the appellant. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This appeal is at the instance of Insurance Company challenging the order of Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, Panipat Circle-I [for short “Commissioner”] dated 30.12.2009 by which on account of death of Raja Khan, Driver of Vehicle No.UP-12D-9809, aged 35 years, compensation of `3,79,120 with interest of `1,29,524, total amounting to `5,08,644, has been awarded with a direction to the appellant to deposit the said amount within 30 days from the date of passing of the order, failing which they shall have to pay further 18% simple interest on the whole amount till its realization. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that parents of the deceased are not dependent upon him as father of the deceased is working as a Teacher in the Masjid. It appears that learned counsel for the appellant has not examined the case file carefully, otherwise he would not have raised this argument because the learned Commissioner has awarded FAO No.2143 of 2010 (O&M) - 2 - ****** compensation only to claimant Nos.8 to 11 who are the widow and minor children of the deceased and compensation to claimant Nos.1 to 7, namely, the parents, brothers and sisters of the deceased, has been specifically declined. He has further argued that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay interest without making a submission on the Insurance Policy as to whether the liability of Insurance Company is excluded or included. Thus, the appellant has been grossly unsuccessful in its feeble attempt to assail the impugned order. No other point has been raised. In view of the above discussion, I do not find any merit in the present appeal and as such, the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. September 22, 2010. vinod* (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) JUDGE