IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE DATED THIS THE 2 15'!" my 01+' AUG¥;$§* i2 'VC}¥'J'3:« BEFORE" _ THE HON'BLE MR. B;AAs§PAfi':Lf"u_f na.F.A.Ho.71§____7 %%op2o,g~_s% (E (:3; [: BETWEEN: A' " V 1.
SMTSAHIDA @ VEI€.i_{E.’!_’E;§H.;%E5FA_’ » % ” ~ . %
SHAYIDA, W/O LATE JAHIR ‘AHMED; ”
AGED ABOUT 24 YE.ARs;.. A A = A’
2. sR1.AB1mi_i,
s/0 LAfi'”E ;;A1=:.s-r«:_V1A1~11s.:f39,V
AGED AI30lJ’l;’_3 YP;A_R’t.’ig Mtrmms
3. Ju:’LAKA.3; A A
s/0–1_.A’rE M.vABDUL-.SU«B»AN,
AGED’*A_Bom* 47′ AYEARS,
.,%i5PE:I,LAN’i”‘I3{€:)V.2 Is MINOR
A-_sm;3E REP.BY MOTHER
« . ., Aim .zq,f.Q’«APPELLANT NO. 1
._ .ALL”ARE RESIDING AT
A , C/O_MEi~_1ABOOB, No.9
‘s’mREs<"'RoAD, KALASIPALYA,
BANGALORE — 550 002. …APPELL.AN'I'S
:B§*sR1.sHR1PAD V.SHASI'RI, ADV.)
Aim:
” 1. SRI.B.A.BASI~{EER AHMED,
S] O ATHAULLA KHAN,
NOJ86, P.M.K. ROAD,
SHAN KARAPURA,
BANGALORE — O4.
2. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.L’1’D.,
NO.6, SRINIVASA MANSKDN,
N03541:, 10-B MAIN,
3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGARA,
BANGALORE — 1 1.
BY ITS MANAGER. ‘ a V’
(BY SRi.P.B.RAJU,ADV.FOR R-2) V V _ . H
THIS MFA FILED U/S 30(1) 01? Wc’*’Ac*I>p;c1A1Ns”F’~¢:’HE
JUDGMENT Arm AWARD DATED ‘–1;7.3.2oo5,.~”.%A PASSED ‘«1r~:=
wcA/ FC/CR–8/2004 ON THE FILE, 015’ THE” ‘-iA1′:’.OU’R OFFICER AND. ‘
COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEWS. c0MPENs’A’I1<}N, SUB—
DIVESION-6, KARMIKA BHAVAN, ¥3A'NNERGHAT*~E'.A, BANGALORE,
ALLOWING THE CLAIM V I'PETITIO'N -EoR"a;::oMPENsAT1oN AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT asjcot-4PE;:~z.sz:;'.r-i»oN, _
THIS MéA'€:Q1vi3i«NG«. ON_ 130;:-r ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERE13 'T1521: F91;-L_o*.x(1NG:
% ts3r_::,;nmH.#….._%GM E N 1'
'iathe claimants seeking enhancement cf
"__;3o1;:;1pe,11se'gti:3r;; order dated 17.8.2005, the Commissioner for
._ Cfzéifipensafion, Bangaiom has awarded
.4comp'é21se:i::i.cri1".in a sum of Rs.3,98,800/- along with interest at
'A x V to tlfxé dependents of the deceased who died in an accident
on 1" Febmaxy, 2004 while he was engaged as a
T "e¥.:'iizer in a lorry. The question that fails for consideration,
A. g regard to the contention taken by the appellant in the
be accepted. In the driving license of the decea,set1_;'ev§7hich is
produced by the claimants themselves, the d_a_;te"cf the
deceased is mentioned as 7.5.1970.
the age of the deceased at the ofecizidexfi jtoT he 34.
years by the Commissioner. 'I'he&'{3etnmiss'=L*.§x1Ve1f has';
the entry made in the of
to the age reconiedvih’~V.the the posm.ox’tem
report. No illegality be attributed to the
approach adoistekl in recording such a
finding. for interference in this
of jurisdiction under Section 30
of the Act.
V» 4.; ” the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
Sd/-t_
Judge