Denial Of Interest For Period Of Delay In Supplying Paper Book Copy To Insurance Company Counsel Not Justified: SC Partly Allows Claimant’s Appeal

The appeal, before the Apex Court, arose out of the impugned judgment vide which the appeal filed by the appellants-claimants was partly accepted enhancing the compensation payable to them. The grievance raised by the appellants claimants was that the High Court had denied interest to them for the period between June 22, 2016 to July 13, 2023.

The Division Bench comprising Justice J.K.Maheshwari and Justice Rajesh Bindal said, “Once the matter was before the Court, the appellants-claimants should not be deprived of the interest for the period between 22.06.2016 to 13.07.2023.”

AOR Harshad V. Hameed represented the Appellants while AOR Mrinal Kanwar represented the Respondents.

The accident, in this case, took place in the year 2006 when the deceased was travelling in his jeep along with his wife(now widow) and children and a bus hit their jeep, resulting in death of the deceased. The appellants-claimants, consisting of the deceased's widow and three daughters, filed a claim appeal before the Tribunal seeking compensation of ₹15,00,000. The Tribunal passed an award of ₹4,15,000 along with interest @ 7.5% per annum in favour of the appellants-claimants, making the driver, owner and the insurance company of the bus liable to pay the same.

Aggrieved against such an award, the appellants-claimants filed an appeal before the High Court. There was a delay of 708 days in filing the appeal. The same was condoned with the condition that on the enhanced compensation, if allowed, the appellants-claimants will not be entitled to claim interest for the period of delay of 708 days. The High Court partly accepted the appeal while enhancing the compensation further by an amount of ₹9,84,500. Further appellants claimants were not allowed interest for the period of delay in supplying the copy of paper book to the standing counsel for the insurance company.

The appellants claimed that they are poor and illiterate persons and the deceased was the only bread earner for the family, working as driver, died leaving behind his widow and three daughters as his dependents. It was further argued that the appeal having been filed before High Court, there had been a delay in the process on account of the fault of the counsel of appellants-claimants, which should not be taken against the appellants-claimants as they were not at fault.

On the issue of assessment of compensation, the Bench observed that the same did not call for interference as the accident took place in 2006. The income of the deceased, claimed to be working as a driver, had been properly assessed at ₹8,750 per month by the High Court. Under other heads also, an appropriate amount of compensation has been awarded. Hence, the award to that extent did not call for interference.

The Bench noted that the claimants had been denied interest on the ground that there was delay on the part of the counsel for the appellants-claimants in not supplying the copy of the paperbook to the counsel for the insurance company. “It cannot be said to be the fault on the part of the appellants-claimants, comparable to a fault in filing the appeal beyond the period of limitation”, it said.

Another aspect of this matter was that the appeal was barred by 708 days. The High Court while condoning the same, specifically directed that the appellants claimants will not be entitled to any interest for the aforesaid period, in case the amount of compensation is enhanced. “The order is quite reasonable. The aforesaid delay in filing the appeal was attributable to the appellants-claimants, hence, they will not be entitled to the interest for the period of 708 days”, the Bench added.

It was further noted that after having filed the appeal and during the pendency, the appellants-claimants should not be made to suffer directing for non-payment of interest, because for such default claimants alone could not be held responsible.

“Consequently, denial of interest to the appellants for the period between 22.06.2016 to 13.07.2023 as directed is not justified”, the Bench said while partly allowing the appeal. The Bench modified the impugned order passed by the High Court to the extent that the appellants-claimants would be entitled to compensation as directed and interest at the same rate for the period between June 22, 2016 to July 13, 2023.

Cause Title:T.C. John @ Yohannan (Deceased) Through Lrs v. V.J. Antony and Others (Neutral Citation:2024 INSC 1016)

Appearance:

Petitioner: AOR Harshad V. Hameed, Advocates Dileep Poolakkot, Ashly Harshad,

Respondent: AOR Mrinal Kanwar, Advocates Vaibhav, Mayank Mikhail Mukherjee, Ujjwal Singh

Click here to read/download Judgment