IN THE} HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 22»-A DAY OF JANUARY, 2010 V.
BEFORE
THE HGNELE MR. 3USTICE V. JAc}ANNATE--AN_:AT"* V
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NG.44ED/QDDVTIQ: .
C /w MISCELLANEOUS EIRST" APPEAL »IIQ.7'.f25_/4200'? {WC};
IN MFA NO.4460/ 2007
BETWEEN:
1. SMT MAHADEVI, w/0 LATE PARI\2I'EVS_'RI IIGARGDI; '
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC: I~IV(IuS~E.I_IDL»D. '
2. K1} MAR ERAPPA, S/O L/5I'F-F£:f'ARM ESEI U"€'£f'uR.CObL,
AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS, occ; NIE;.--. ' --.
3. MISS. PARVATI, D19 LATE 'PAR'LIESPIII..DGA.RGDL
AGED ABOUT"? '7--'3.'\'RS, QCC: --I~I'IL."4. ' '
APPELLANT I\%()4'vS.'fz_"--AI:\}'I")"3Ts__AREj{'RE'}7R_Eé3E'E'JTE.D BY
APPELLAINT"1I\ID..:1'L:IS ~NA'TD'R.AL G'UAR'DIAN
MOTHER. _ . '
4. SMT. SATY-AvvA._\Iv,{D_PARAJIE.SHI UGARGOL,
AGED AEDUT 25 YEARS; Vojcc: HOUSE HOLD.
5. MISS S_OMAV\/ALAEV)/'()' LATE PARMESHI UGARGOL,
.AG.ED_AI3QUT 4 YEAR_S.»0CC: NIL.
.6.' nKDMAR.NAI}AKAPPA, S /0 LATE PARMESHI UGARGOL,
AGEDI-.AEDUTf_:'s*yEARS, occ: NIL
{APPELI.AN*I\S".jNG;=sV AND 6 ARE REPRESENTED BY
PE'I'I.Ti'IONE3P. _N§;>.4, WHO ES THE NATURAL GUARDIAN
MoTH:ER;=-- A
--- V ALLARE RESIDENT' OF KADABI VILLAGE
..f~EN SGUNDATTI TALUKA, NOW RESIDING AT
'- ' SONAEWADI AT KHANAPUR TALUKA 591 302,
. DIST. EELGAUM. ....APPE)LLANTS
' 'I ~~(SY SR1. SANJAY S. KATAGERI, ADV.)
- ~. ,_ SETW-3.:EN:'
id
AND:
1.. SI-IRI PARASHANT (':O\/INI') SAWANT,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O MAI-IAVIEZER NAGAR, KI-IANAPUR ROAD,
AT NAD POST: PEERANWADI
TAL AND DIST. E3I33I..GAUM 590 005.
(OWNER OF' GOOD TRUCK BEARING
NO.KA 22/B8325)
2. THE MANAGER,
NEW INDIA INSURNACE CO. luff].-'€31'
BHAVANI CHAMBERS, BEJLGAUM.
CLUB ROAD, BELGAUIVI 590 002.
3. SMT. DOOOAVA. w/O i<LAREAPPA--I_UG.ARGO, A
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC: IIOUSI.=:R.OLI')
R/O KADAB1 VII,LAGE1,TQ. SOUNDATTJ,_"".._ ' _,
DIST. BELGAUM 590 .319. _4 V ...RESPONOENTS
(BY SR1. RAVI G. SABHAHIT, AOy".'RO.R.I'R;2. NIOTICEITO RI DISPENSED
WITH V/O/D E7/'09/V2069} I I * ..
THIS AI?PEfiAI;_IS 'I'ILI:D-LINDIER SECTION 30(1) OF WC ACT
AGAINS THE ORDER"--1.T9_ATED'3[2/2O--O.7'wPASSED IN WCA.NO.SR:20/O6
ON TI»IEjI1'ILE'OE-'fI'HE iASS"r.*I,ABOuR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER
FOR wGRII2NSAT1ON AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COI.rII=z%:NS.ATION.
IN MITA'NO..7725/20G? III/Iv)"
TI»IE.,MANAG,ER,' ' V
NEW IN.D1A,_AS.SLI,RANCE CO. LTD,
'BHAVANI"'C,¥1§.AMBEES, BELGALINI,
REPRESENT'E-D BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER
AT, 2.33, UNITY jISIIII.I>ING ANNEX,
. MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE 560 027. .. APPELLANT
jay SRI. RAI/I G. SAENAIIIT, ADV.)
_ ANIIQ
= PRASIIANT O-Ox/INI) SAV/--\I'5T,
MAJOR BY AGE. OCC: BUSINESS,
J
R/O MAl~iAVEE.CR NAG/-'IR, KI-{ANA?UR ROAD,
PEERANWADI POST, EBICLGAUIN/E TO. AND DIST.
2. SI'/ET. MAHADEVI, W/O PARAMEESI-II UGARGO,
AGED 27 YEARS, EIOUSEHOLIJ WORK,
O)
KUMAR IRAPPA, Sff) I3'ARAMES'r{I UCIARGOL,
AGD 5 YEARS MINOR,
4. KUMARI PARVATI, D/O PARAMESHI U_G»AvF€G4OL, I'
AGED ABOUT 3 YARS, MINOR. I ..
No.3 AND 4 MINORS, REPRESENTED SN T"I-IDIR
MOTHER, NATURAL GUARDIAN. 'R.--2 ABOVE?) "
5. SMT. SATYAVVA, W/O RARAA/1ESOI'I"RI,If0ARGo,"'
AGED 26 YEARS. «-
6. KUIVIARI SDMAWA, D /C..415A-'RAIN-IESHIVSIUGARGOL,
A0ED5YEARS,IvIINoR. - a .
'-I
KUMAR NAYAKAPPA, S /0'RAI2AMI§:S.II'I' _LIS'ARg§'o:,,'
AGI:D4YEARS.,--NIIN_0R.;. _,
No.6 AND 7 MINORSSREI-PRE.SE1\I'F.ED'---E3Y:TH SIR
MOTHER NATURAL'SIIAR--D.IAN--.R.5 ASD\/I3.
NO. 2 TO 7 ARE ASLR}/OVSO'NAW.AWA~Dl,
KHANAPUR, TALUK, DE;L.0AI,IMA.DIST.
8. SMT. DODDAVVA :<_AI'"PA'~UGAR00,
AGED 50 YEARS,' HOUSEHOLD WORK.
R4/go KADABI \7IL._LAGI:, SOUNDATTI TQ.,
Now R/AT S0NARw.A..DI'AT KHANAPUR TALUK,
- I V 13RI'3:,GA.UM DI_STRIcT. ..RESPONDENTS
_§B\Ij SORT. A~S_fI:ATAGSRI, ADV. FOR R2;
"THIS A}T??PE§AL IS FILEIJ UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF w.c. ACT
AGAI-SNT JUDGMENT DATED 03.02.2007 PASSED IN
ALOB/WCA/FC/SR/20/2006(OLD WCA/SR.148/2005) ON THE) FILE
WOF THELABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN
"._COMEENSATION, BELGAUM DIVISION, BELGAUM AWARDING
_ ~._I:0IvIP~RNSATI0N 0;? RS.2,I4,69a/W WITII INTEREST AT RATE OF 12%
TH}:-ISE3 APPEJALS ARE) COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
I COURT DIEIJVISRIIZID TI--IE I-?OI,LOWING:
JUDGMENT
These two appeals arise out of one and the sarnebrder
passed by the Workmen’s Compensation Cor1jirri’ispsi»:ii1ei°«F
Belgaum and first of the two appeals is by
seeking enhancement of the conipensation _.w_hereas*–:lth’e;
appeal of the insurance company is cc-ncernirig the.
interest granted by the Commis.sii’o.ner. . _ I V
2. So far as the claimantsfi appeal is concerned,
submission made by leg-iilrn§;dVil.’co’u_insel Sri. Sanjay S.
Katagei’il;oAAf11at the’i’Cornrnis_s1oner erred in taking the
income the deceaiseed”a._tllR,sl.Q,O64 / ~ per month whereas the
evidence on; record isvhows that the deceased was paid
per day’~b.},.I.«’the employer for the quarry Work.
Referririgl’to*the–._eVidence of the employer, learned counsel
argiicld income be taken at Rs.150/~ per day and
also reliance on a Division Bench ruling of this Court
ll..flrepo’:tedHin ILR 200? KAR 1289.
}w
,»=
3. On the other hand Sri. Ravi G. Sabhahit,
learned counsei for the insurance company argued tT:ia’tethe
Commissioner was justified in taking the _.i17l.(:JO.Ifl’i(3i’V:”.i’ri.1″‘C,.
Rs.2,064/» based on the reievant notification the-.;5ei~iod’i K
concerned and as such in the absenee’ofl~do(:’onientv’being
produced by the claimants indica.tifig_ the
to the deceased, no error can bevtfound in’the’iVw_ia;ge”stb taken by
the Commissioner. farflasi t_:’int’orest is” concerned,
submission made is thatlit’is7payablei’~.onei’ month after the
date of death at .i;;>.%_.
4%. ~ _ilr’1i5I;healiight–.oif~«tVhe_above submission and having
gone throtighé the.V_evid–en’eel’131% record, I am of the View that
the I’A.I”.f..’,OI’I’i€ii’i(;C)_:1i.1l’C§~.’il’1aii’C’B6611 taken at Rs.120/– per day
6 _____ H.” W l {E _ ‘vv>cj1″£>”~3
..beC’a.use.?ith’eA.& employer: 1&2}? jieyei-iwéfgrifmthough in the
‘__€X{3,Il’}1f1a’E1QIi~1i71~C’f1%.Cf, +&%@fl is silent on this aspect. As
stated abolvefitiiincome at Rs.120/~ per day is taken/as the
lrnpwages ~pai’;d to the deceased employee, the compensation gets
out at Rs.3,74,364/~ as against the amount of
i Rls.2,E4,698/~ quantified by the Commissioner. Therefore,
?%
(}
the order is modified and the compensation to which the
Claimants are entitied is Rs.3,74,36-4/~. interest payable will
be at 12% one month after the death and not as given by the
Commissioner.
Both the appeals stand disposed of in the _
In View of the amount being modified
proportionate amount be deposited in;-rezsipeetiof”the’Vin_inerA
Chiidren as per the order of -the Cor_n”missio’rIeV1′.__V Ifganiy
P’
amount in deposit before this Court, the same be transferred
to the W.C. CommissioI1ie.r’;«.
kmv