K.T.Sankaran, J.
Respondents 1 to 4 and since deceased Kittunni are the legal representatives of deceased P.K.Vasu. According to respondents 1 to 4 and Kittunni, Vasu was working as toddy tapper under the appellant (Shelly.P.K.) and late Vasu was measuring toddy in the shop of which Shelly was the licensee. Vasu fell down from the palm tree during the course of his employment. The legal representatives of Vasu claimed Workmen's Compensation. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Thrissur, as per Exhibit P1 order dated 30.12.2005 held that the legal representatives of Vasu are entitled to get a compensation of ₹1,99,400/- (Rupees One lakh ninety nine thousand and four hundred only) together with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the accident, namely, 31.3.1999, to the date of deposit. The legal representatives of Vasu were also held entitled to get ₹1,000/- towards funeral expenses. The appellant filed an application to set aside the ex-parte order passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner in 2007. That application was dismissed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner as per the order dated 25th May, 2011.
2. The appellant had engaged a lawyer to represent him before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner. He filed vakalath, but later neither the lawyer nor the appellant appeared before the Commissioner. The appellant was set ex-parte and the order dated 30th December, 2005 was passed. The order passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner dismissing the application for setting aside the ex-parte order was challenged by the appellant in W.P.(C) No.1607 of 2014. The learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition by the judgment dated 8th July, 2014, which is under challenge in this Writ Appeal.
3. When the Writ Appeal came up for admission on 30.9.2014, we granted a day's time at the request of the learned counsel for the appellant to see whether the matter can be settled. Today, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for both parties that the disputes and differences between the parties have been settled. The appellant agrees to pay a sum of Rupees Two lakhs in full and final settlement of all the claims of the legal representatives of the deceased Vasu. It is submitted that a sum of ₹50,000/- was deposited before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner in compliance with the direction issued by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.1607 of 2014. It is submitted that the amount of ₹50,000/- can be adjusted towards the aforesaid sum of Rupees Two lakhs. The learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that the parties agreed that the balance amount of ₹1,50,000/- can be paid to the first respondent (Beena.P.V.) for and on behalf of all the legal representatives of the deceased Vasu on or before 10.10.2014. The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties are recorded and the Writ Appeal is accordingly disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties. The order passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner in W.C.C.No.69 of 2001 will stand modified to that effect, provided the conditions are complied with by the appellant within time. If the appellant fails to comply with the conditions mentioned above, the Writ Appeal will stand dismissed and the order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation fixing the compensation amount would stand revived.
Post on 15.10.2014 for reporting compliance.
K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl P.D.RAJAN JUDGE