ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. RACHAN KAUR AND ORS.
LAWS(P&H)-2014-11-198
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on November 25,2014

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Appellant
VERSUS
Rachan Kaur And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The appellant-Insurance Company has challenged the order dated 10th June 1999 passed by the Commissioner, under the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, Mohali camp at Ropar, whereby, while awarding compensation and interest to the claimants on account of death of Darshan Singh, penalty to the tune of 25% of the compensation amount was also awarded under Section 4-A(3)(b) of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') and the appellant was burdened with the liability to pay such penalty along with compensation and interest.
(2.) According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the liability to pay penalty, under the provisions of the Act, is of the employer and the appellant cannot be burdened with such a liability. In support of his case, he relies on the dicta in Ved Parkash Garg v. Premi Devi , 1997 AIR(SC) 3854 and on the basis of the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel submits that the appellant-Insurance Company cannot be burdened with the liability to pay penalty under Section 4-A(3)(b) of the Act.
(3.) It may be noticed that the employer i.e. respondent No.4 was served with the summons but none appeared on his behalf. The observations of the Supreme Court in Ved Parkash Garg's case may also be noticed, which read thus: "As a result of the aforesaid discussion, it must be held that the question posed for our consideration must be answered partly in the affirmative and partly in the negative. In other words, the insurance company will be liable to meet the claim for compensation along with interest as imposed on the insured employer by the Workmen's Commissioner under the Compensation Act on the conjoint operation of Section 3 and Section 4-A sub Section (3)(a) of the Compensation Act. So far as additional amount of compensation by way of penalty imposed on the insured employer by the Workmen's Commissioner under Section 4-A(3)(b) is concerned, however, the insurance company would not remain liable to reimburse the said claim and it would be the liability of the insured employer alone.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.