BABU v. MALLAPPA
Case at a glance
- Bench
- V SRISHANANDA
Outcome
Allowed
(i) Appeal is allowed in part
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 1515. Accordingly, the quantum of compensation is re- assessed as under: 1 Loss of earning capacity [6500 (60% = 3900) (3900X207.98X15%) Rs.1,21,668/- 2 Medical Expenses Rs.61,870/- Total Rs.1,83,538/-
- Para 1616. In view of the above discussion, the following order is passed: ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) As against the sum of Rs.86,960/- as awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant would be entitled the compensation to a sum of Rs.1,83,538/- with interest…
Judgment
(BY SRI. R.R. MANE, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 SERVED) SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR 15:26:48 +0530 …RESPONDENTS THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE IN JUDGMENT ECA.NO.53/2014, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BAGALKOT, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. DTD.17.06.2019, PASSED AWARD AND THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1053 MFA No. 101425 of 2020 JUDGMENT Though the matter is listed for admission, by consent of parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
Heard Shri. Prashant S. Kadadevar, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri. R. R. Mane, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
Present appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the judgment and award passed in ECA No.53/2014 dated
17.06.2019 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Bagalkote.
Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under:
4.1. A claim petition came to be filed under Section 22 of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 (for short ‘the W.C. Act), seeking awarding of compensation in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident occurred during the course of his employment involving a Cruiser vehicle bearing registration No.KA-28/N- 0716 on 20.07.2012. - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1053 MFA No. 101425 of 2020
The claim petition was resisted by the Insurance Company by filling necessary written statement. Whereas, the employer remained absent and he was placed exparte.
The learned Trial Judge raised necessary issues thereafter and considered the oral and documentary evidence placed on record by the claimant as well as the Insurance Company and allowed the claim petition in part and awarded a sum of Rs.86,960/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
Being aggrieved by the same, the claimant is in appeal.
Shri. Prashant S. Kadadevar, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal has not taken the proper monthly income and it should have been taken at the rate of Rs.6,500/- as monthly income, for the injuries said to have been sustained in the year 2012 and therefore, sought for re-assessment of the compensation.
He also contended that because of the accidental injuries, earning capacity has been reduced to a considerable extent and sought for suitable enhancement. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1053 MFA No. 101425 of 2020
Per contra, Shri. R. R. Mane, learned counsel for respondent No.2 opposes the appeal grounds and supports the impugned judgment and award and sought for dismissal of the appeal.
In view of the rival contentions urged by the parties, this Court perused the material on record meticulously.
On such perusal of the material on record, it is seen that the claimant has established accidental injuries during the course of his employment involving a vehicle bearing registration No.KA-28/N-0716.
In the absence of proper income proof, and also having taken note of the fact that first respondent being the employer who remained absent before the Trial Court and placed exparte, the only course that was open for the Tribunal was to assess the monthly income assessed notionally for the accidental injuries sustained in the year 2012 in a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month. It should have been Rs.6,500/- per month. Therefore, a case is made out by the claimant for enhancement of the compensation.
Therefore, loss of earning capacity is to be re- assessed by taking monthly income in a sum of Rs.6,500/-, - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1053 MFA No. 101425 of 2020 60% of which in a sum of Rs.3,900/-. Disability was assessed by the Tribunal at 5% is to be re-assessed at 15%, taking note of the fact that the treated doctor who has been examined has assessed the disability at 15%.
Accordingly, the quantum of compensation is re- assessed as under: 1 Loss of earning capacity [6500 (60% = 3900) (3900X207.98X15%) Rs.1,21,668/- 2 Medical Expenses Rs.61,870/- Total Rs.1,83,538/-
Operative part
In view of the above discussion, the following order is passed: ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) As against the sum of Rs.86,960/- as awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant would be entitled the compensation to a sum of Rs.1,83,538/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a., 30 days after - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1053 MFA No. 101425 of 2020 the date of accident i.e., from 20.08.2012 till deposit. (iii) Balance sum if any is to be deposited by the Insurance Company within a period of four weeks. Sd/- JUDGE SMM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: (i) Appeal is allowed in part
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 — s. 22.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.