Smt. Pani Devi v. Shri Rohit Gurjar

Smt. Pani Devi W/o Shri Gopal Nat aged 62 years, Appellants No.2 to 4 are minor through its natural guardian/Mother Smt. Seema Devi Wd/o Late Hemraj Nat. All Resident of Village Mandiyani Tehsil Nasirabad, Distt. Ajmer. ----Appellants/Claimants Versus

Shri Rohit Gurjar S/o Shri Ramchandra Gurjar R/o-1347 Jaipuria Mohalla, Nasirabad Distt. Ajmer. (Employer).

Cholamandlam MS General Insurance Company Limited, through its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, E-32- Second Floor, ARG Group Building, Chitranjan Marg, Jaipur. ----Respondents/Non-Claimants For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Singh Rahtore, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chanderdeep Singh Jodha, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI Order RESERVED ON : 07/08/2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 28/08/2025 [2025:RJ-JP:33967] (2 of 8) [CMA-2436/2015] vihykFkhZx.k lhek nsoh oxSjg dh vksj ls ;g vihy varxZr /kkjk 30 deZpkjh {kfriwfrZ vf/kfu;e] 1923 ds varxZr fo}ku U;k;ky; vk;qä] deZpkjh {kfriwfrZ vf/kfu;e] 1923] vtesj] ftyk vtesj }kjk çdj.k la[;k WCA(F) 62/2013 esa ikfjr vkyksP; vkns'k fnukad 25-03-2015 ls O;fFkr gksdj çLrqr dh gS] ftlds ek/;e ls fo}ku vk;qä }kjk vihykFkhZx.k dks 6]23]940@& :i;s {kfriwfrZ jkf'k vkSj ml ij nkok çLrqr djus dh fnukad ls vkns'k ikfjr djus dh fnukad 25-03-2015 rd 12 izfr'kr okf"kZd C;kt tks 14 ekg dk 87]351@& :i;s curk gS] og rFkk chek daiuh dks vkns'k dh fnukad ls 60 fnu ds vanj eqvkots o C;kt ds dqy 7]11]291@& :i;s U;k;ky; esa tek djk, tkus dk vkns'k fn;k x;k gSA vihykFkhZx.k ds fo}ku vfHkHkk"kd dk cgl ds nkSjku ;g rdZ jgk gS fd e`rd gsejkt 30 o"khZ; Fkk tks Hkkjh okgu dk pkyd Fkk vkSj 10]000@& :i;s çfrekg vk; vftZr djrk Fkk] mls çfrfnu 100@& :i;s nSfud HkÙkk Hkh feyrk Fkk] tks osru dk gh Hkkx gS] ysfdu mDr rF;ksa ij fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us dksbZ /;ku ugha fn;k gS vkSj fof/k fo:) vkns'k ikfjr fd;k gSA blds vfrfjä nq?kZVuk ?kfVr gksus dh fnukad ls Hkh C;kt ugha fnyok;k tkdj fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us fof/kd =qfV dh gSA blds vfrfjä fu; ksäk ij isuYVh ugha yxk, tkus o fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk nSfud HkÙks dks osru esa 'kkfey ugha fd, tkus dh Hkh fof/kd Hkwy dh gSA vr% mijksDrkuqlkj e`rd dk osru fu/kkZj.k fd;k tkdj {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fnyokbZ tkos rFkk nq?kZVuk dh fnukad ls C;kt rFkk ns; isuYVh jkf'k dk Hkqxrku djok;k tkosA vihykFkhZx.k ds fo}ku vfHkHkk"kd dh vksj ls vius rdksaZ ds laca/k esa fuEufyf[kr fofu'p; çLrqr fd;s x;s%&

1. Jaya Biswal & Ors vs Branch Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr. (2016) 11 SCC 201 [2025:RJ-JP:33967] (3 of 8) [CMA-2436/2015] izR;FkhZ ds fo}ku vfHkHkk"kd dk cgl ds nkSjku ;g rdZ jgk gS fd e`rd gsejkt ojoDr nq?kZVuk 10]000@& :i;s vk; vftZr djrk gks vkSj mls 100@& :i;s nSfud HkÙkk feyrk gks] bl laca/k esa e`rd gsejkt dk osru ls lacaf/kr dksbZ çek.k i= ;k vU; dksbZ nLrkost çLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us e`rd ds pkyd gksus ds vk/kkj ij dq'ky deZdkj dh ifjHkk"kk esa vkus ds dkj.k ls 6]000@& :i;s çfrekg lgh :i ls osru fu/kkZj.k fd;k gSA e`rd gsejkt dh 30 o"kZ vk;q rFkk 6]000@& :i;s çfrekg osru ekurs gq, e`rd ds ekfld osru dk 50 izfr'kr rFkk lqlaxr QsDVj 207-98 ds vk/kkj ij fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us lgh :i ls 6]23]940@& :i;s {kfriwfrZ jkf'k nsus dk vkns'k fn;k gS rFkk nkok çLrqr djus dh fnukad ls Hkh C;kt fnykus esa dksbZ fof/kd =qfV fopkj.k U;k;ky; us ugha dh gSA blds vfrfjä fu; ksäk dks dksbZ uksfVl ugha fn;k x;k gS] uk gh lquokbZ dk volj fn;k x;k gS] ,slh fLFkfr esa fof/kd çko/kkuksa ds rgr isuYVh ugha yxkbZ tk ldrh gSA vr% vihykFkhZx.k dh vihy vLohdkj dj [kkfjt dh tkosA çR;FkhZ ds fo}ku vfHkHkk"kd us vius rdksaZ ds laca/k esa fuEufyf[kr fofu'p; çLrqr fd;k%&

1. North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Sujatha 2018 INSC 1036 eSaus mHk;i{kksa ds rdksZa ij euu fd;k rFkk i=koyh dk voyksdu fd; kA or Zeku izdj.k esa fnukad 03-10-2013 dks e`rd gsejkt okgu la[;k RJ 01-GA-3106 ij pkyd Fkk rFkk okgu dk [kyklh gjn; ky FkkA izdj.k ds rF;ksa ds vuqlkj jkf= ds le; okgu dk Vk;j iapj gks tkus ds dkj.k og [kyklh dh enn dj Vk;j [kqyok jgk FkkA rHkh ,d dkj rst xfr] xQyr o ykijokgh ls vk;h vkSj mlus MªkbZoj gsejkt ds VDdj ekj [2025:RJ-JP:33967] (4 of 8) [CMA-2436/2015] nhA mls mipkj gsrq jktdh; fpfdRlky; Hkstk x;k] tgka bykt ds nkSjku mldh e`R;q gks x;hA bl izdj.k esa iqfyl }kjk izn'kZ&5 vafre fjiksVZ vne irk okgu o vfHk;qDr esa nh x;h gSA fdl O;fDr dh ykijokgh ls nq?kZVuk ?kfVr gqbZ] nq?kZVuk dkfjr djus esa dkSulk okgu varoZfyr Fkk] ;g rF; bl izdj.k esa Li"V ugh gqvk gSA ojoDr nq?kZVuk e`rd gsejkt dgka dk; Zjr Fkk] mls fdruk osru feyrk Fkk] fdl izdkj ls mldh 10]000@& :i;s izfrekg vk; Fkh] bl laca/k esa dksbZ Hkh izek.k i= vihykFkhZx.k dh vksj ls izLrqr ugh fd;k x;k gS] uk gh ;g rF; lk{; ds ek/;e ls lkfcr fd;k gSA fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us e`rd gsejkt] tks pkyd Fkk] mldk dq'ky Jfed ds vk/kkj ij 6]000@& :i;s izfrekg osru ekuk gSA e`rd gsejkt dh 30 o"kZ dh vk;q ds vk/kkj ij fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us 207-98 dk lgh QsDVj dke esa ysdj 6]23]940@& :i;s {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fu/kkZfjr dh gS] ftlesa fdlh izdkj dh =qfV fof/kd izko/kkuksa ds rgr utj ugh vkrh gSA e`rd dks nSfud HkÙkk 100@& :i;s feyrk gks] bl laca/k esa Hkh dksbZ lk{; izLrqr ugh gqbZ gSA Jaya Biswal & Ors vs Branch Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr.

(2016) 11 SCC 201 ds fofu'p; ds rF;ksa ds vuqlkj e`rd mPp Lrjh; dq'ky deZdkj Fkk vkSj og jkT; ls ckgj ;k=k ij tk;k djrk Fkk vkSj okgu iath;u jk"Vªh; :V ijfeV ds :i esa FkkA ,slh fLFkfr esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us 4]000@& :i;s osru o 6]000@& :i;s izfrekg nSfud HkÙkk ekurs gq, 10]000@& :i;s dqy vk; ekuh gS] tcfd or Zeku izdj.k esa ,slh fLFkfr ugh gSA bl izdj.k esa pkyd gsejkt mPp Lrjh; dq'ky deZdkj gks o pkyd ds :i esa jkT; ls ckgj tkrk gks vkSj mlds ikl jk"Vªh; :V [2025:RJ-JP:33967] (5 of 8) [CMA-2436/2015] ijfeV gks] ,slh dksbZ fLFkfr lkeus ugh vk;h gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa vihykFkhZx.k dh vksj ls izLrqr mDr fofu'p; ls vihykFkhZx.k dks dksbZ lgk; rk izkIr ugh gksrh gSA tgka rd {kfriwfrZ jkf'k ij C;kt fnyok;s tkus dk iz'u gS] bl izdj.k esa fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk nkok nk;j djus dh frfFk ls vkns'k ikfjr djus dh fnukad 25-03-2015 rd 12 izfr'kr okf"kZd C;kt fnyok;k gS] tks fd esjs fouez er esa fuEu fofu'p;ksa esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fl)karksa dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, mfpr izrhr ugh gksrk gS%& Shobha & Others Vs.

Chairman, Vithalrao Shinde Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited & Others (2022) 13 SCC 172 Thus, from Section 4A of the Act, 1923 "4.1 compensation under Section 4 shall be paid as soon as it falls due. It can be seen that the liability to pay the interest on the amount of compensation due and 4 payable would be under Section 4A(3)(a) and the penalty would be leviable under Section 4A(3)(b). As per Section 4A(3)(a), the employer shall pay, in addition to the amount of the arrears, simple interest thereon @ 12% p.a. or at such higher rate not exceeding the maximum of the lending rates of any scheduled bank as may be specified on the amount due. As per Section 4A(1) compensation under section 4 shall be paid as soon as it falls due. Therefore, on the death of the employee/deceased immediately, compensation can be said to be falling due. Therefore, the liability to pay the compensation would arise immediately on the death of the deceased.

Even as per Section 4A(2), in cases, where the employer does not accept the liability for compensation to the extent claimed, he shall be bound to make provisional payment based on the extent of liability which he accepts, and, such payment shall be deposited with the Commissioner or made to the employee, as the case may the amount [2025:RJ-JP:33967] (6 of 8) [CMA-2436/2015] be, without prejudice to the right of the employee to make any further claim. Therefore, the liability to pay the compensation would arise from the date on which the deceased died for which he is entitled to the compensation and therefore, the liability to pay the interest on the amount of arrears/compensation shall be from the date of accident and not from the date of the order passed by the Commissioner. As per Section 4A(3)(b), if the Commissioner is satisfied that there is no justification for the delay, it can direct the employer, in 5 addition to the amount of the arrears and interest thereon, to pay a further sum not exceeding 50% of such amount by way of penalty.

Thus, provision for interest and provision for penalty are different. As observed hereinabove, the provision for levy of interest would be under Section 4A(3)(a) and the provision for levy of penalty would be under Section 4A(3)(b). While directing the employer to pay the interest from the date of the order passed by the Commissioner, the High Court has not at all considered Section 4A(3)(a) and has considered Section 4A(3)(b) only, which is the penalty provision.

Under the circumstances, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court directing the employee to pay the interest on the amount of compensation as leviable under Section 4A(3)(a) from the date of the order passed by the Commissioner, i.e., 25.01.2017 is unsustainable. " Saberabibi Yakubbhai Shaikh & Ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors (2014) 2 SCC 298 " 10. We have perused the aforesaid judgment. We are of the considered opinion that the aforesaid judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants is fully applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. This Court considered the earlier judgment relied upon by the High Court and observed that the judgments in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mubasir Ahmed [(2007) 2 SCC 349] and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mohd. Nasir [2025:RJ-JP:33967] (7 of 8) [CMA-2436/2015]