High Court Karnataka High Court

The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Sri Durgamba on 2 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Sri Durgamba on 2 September, 2008
Author: Manjula Chellur Malimath
'AND:
:l . "'$r:i. Di2?;f;g'3.rs:'t:§,"fli~;£3;Vja;*: in age;
 shunt; 48 years,

'k'-_A§a;ya§ Shimbga. ... RE3?G§ENTS

 Sri: G.S. Ealagangadhfi £93: z"'.'.';'R~»-2}

Efi THE HIGH saga? 93 KARAEAKAf EA§GALORE
mgxgs @313 was 2" BAR G? SE?TEH%ER 2$@$a 
yazssxw 'V'4'

$33 HQE'BL£ MR$a §asT:cE_mAnJUL§"¢§g;#Ug.V=

g§3
$33 ggxggag MR. JUSTICE Rav;m$§L:MgmH"

mac. §’1F£T APPEAL He.$!B§¢§- ¢§ f209’7’5l–:§¢z::)

EEE%EEN
‘rim New Irma &S$u;~fa.né3e.’j. ‘
Cc. Ltd. ,Bma;nc:h sigma,
Knndayur, uaupi_Distri¢t_
Repxwaated by its?

Regioarzaj. ‘ ” ‘f %
Na.2+3, Unity Building” v.”

Annex, Mission iieactg ‘. ,

Bangalmre~=»~5féL’–{‘i. 027.’ APPELI.$;N’E

€By5szi;&g,g.yEha: a ski éasanthappa Adv”)
?_p¢3» negzsg main fioady
” -~ –. Efiasxgdapur , ‘ izgmpi Bist .

” ,_S,fcé.v Eyed Husein,
*§*-E;es:if;d;i;zag at Savaji

gf: .

….3.oss af aarning capacity.

ixzfizzry in qxgestisa was just a fzastfazre cf

alavicle ané r;:a.3.~m’::;,m: af the aiaariala ‘2:$;3;V3;c%;’_’ ;*;;at
in

definitaly refizzit

ca§acityg

éfi mg sanstitfitiaa aegagh :..’§5.–=~ t:~;;.s”

air&a§§* $§ifi&§. that_ $3; §zéé¥ kg §$id;’E%at tha
mieyae gzggmgneé 3.39% lass
95 aa;r::.ir;gv 92113; with
referencg. ‘};%W;wa$ dsixzg as <52:
the wit}: refierenae to
akl é$he§*§§§k; ha cgfiid fiave fifine as on the éate

af acci§gnt% V

32;: t1Aié;tv….:z3;e*ae' msf the matter, unless there

'i§sl'~ .ev§.§;&.%x;*<:,e ""t¢ Show that apart from the wcrk of a

H :3i}..d.er, it wouid neat be a definite case of 190%

The evidence cf ‘aha

dmctor is neutral can thia agpeirtz. He dses not

242% 1333

give any evidence with reference to czther nature
of work which the injured is capable o:E’V.-dczing

with these disabilities. In that v5.es»Vc;+$’L:<..T:;£:;e

matter, the ends cf justice weuld befiaet,

matter is xemanded back ta. _the;' co::¥g~:;i"sé:L:e:ieri'_AVV£eV;""

fresh assessment: after givirig aggfiytirtunifijg

the yarties to 1ea:c1–fl€'1;r{;he2rvvhévidfinge in the light

915' the above QbS&r'€f£§!:'iGns'.–.A 'i "

ig-eimiilowed in part.

The c;sd_e;f;§”v..§ia£§ag1′,_24} 2*i:g:3:6′–:i;n_$5}:/CR/41/2003 on the
file –_ ” Warkrnan’ s Ccszrpensation,
Shirmgfi is v:sé«=!;V ‘Elie matter is ratnitted

bacgig’ ” to V filial’ V” Comnissicner for Workman’ s

_ {;g:}ig¥{‘§§:63’ii’g”553′-1’tT3.’a”§/1 , far fresh disposal . The

give opportunity to both the

pAa.:_;ji:.’E.e.v;-z,,”_i’ paxticular, the injureci ta lead

ft:rt22;=:x9’i- evidence regarding the disabilities

ssiéizained by him. Both parties are directed ta

be present before the concerned authority on

W13.1e.2eee. The Czmxnissiozzer shall dispose of

the matter within three months; from 13.10.2968.

50% 9: the axzsauzat still, in deposit s_1’z~z{l3, ‘~._he

rafundefi, to the agpellant as tha ath%£ ‘$$%f*i$flV

alzeady drawn by the raspcggent _in3fi£e§;E Tfiéw

withdrawal of the amount@ by £fi