Bombay High Court

NISAR BASHIRBHAI SHAIKHversusBHASKAR BHAUSAHEB THORAT AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Holding

The Court affirmed the Labour Court’s discretion to deny penalty but directed that 12% interest be payable from the date of the accident until realization.

Summary

The petitioner, Nisar Bashirbhai Shaikh, challenged a 30 April 2012 order of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and the First Labour Court, Ahmednagar, which denied a penalty and 12% interest from the date of accident in WC Application No.38/2009. He argued, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Siby George, that interest should accrue from the accident date and that a penalty should be imposed. The respondents contended that interest was payable only up to the date of payment and that the Labour Court’s discretion under Section 4A(3)(b) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, to refuse penalty should be respected. The High Court held that the discretion to deny penalty was correctly exercised and should not be interfered with, but modified the order to award 12% interest from the accident date until realization. Consequently, the writ petition was partly allowed, granting the petitioner interest from the accident date while leaving the penalty denied.

Issues considered

Whether the Labour Court erred in exercising its discretion under Section 4A(3)(b) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, in refusing to impose a penalty.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to 12% interest on the due amount from the date of the accident or only up to the date of payment.

Legislation cited

Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 — s. 4A(3)(b)

Subjects

Workmen's Compensation
interest
penalty
discretion
Section 4A(3)(b)
writ petition
Labour Court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:13602
                                                                            79.odt


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          79 WRIT PETITION NO. 8298 OF 2016

                                 Nisar Bashirbhai Shaikh
                                         VERSUS
                           Bhaskar Bhausaheb Thorat And Others

                                            …..
          Mr. Barde Parag Vijay, Advocate for the Petitioner
          Mr. R. K. Temkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2
          Mr. Vinayak Upadhye, Advocate for Respondent No.3
                                            …..


                                        CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                        DATE       : 24.03.2026


          PER COURT :

          1.    Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.


          2.    The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 30.04.2012 passed
          by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and Judge, First
          Labour Court, Ahmednagar, in WC Application No.38/2009 to the
          extent of not imposing penalty and not granting 12% interest from the
          date of accident.


          3.    The learned counsel Mr. Barde for the petitioner submits that
          interest ought to have been awarded from the date of accident. In
          support of his contention, he relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble
          Apex Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Siby George & Ors.; AIR
          2012 SC 3144. He further submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by
          the non-consideration of his claim for 12% interest from the date of
          accident as well as by the refusal to grant penalty.

                                               1
                                                                      79.odt


4.      The learned counsel Mr. Temkar for respondent Nos. 1 and 2
submits that the amount was already paid pursuant to the order passed
by the Court in 2012. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to receive
interest only from the date of accident until the date of payment.


5.      Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, as
regards penalty, it is the discretion of the Court under Section 4A(3)(b)
of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The Labour Court has
rightly exercised its discretion in not granting penalty. Once such
discretion has been exercised, I find no reason to interfere with the
said finding. As regards the 12% interest, I am inclined to allow the
writ petition partly.


6.      In view thereof, the present petition is partly allowed. The order
passed by the Commissioner, particularly Clause No.2, is modified.
Instead of interest being payable from 30.04.2012, it is held that the
petitioner is entitled to receive 12% interest on the due amount from
the date of accident till realization.




                                         [SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.]




Sameer/March-2026




                                         2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…