IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA V
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF %
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ZBIY.NACARATI~1_I$I;9e;vE 7
M.F.A.NO. i3_Q}_7)__80/IC).0_'{')'9 5: %
BETWEEN:
1.
Nagashetty, _
S/0. Narasappa Pulla, V
Aged 52 years, OeC:'A.gTicu1I»nre§'. I V' " "
W/0. Nagaflshetty, "
Agec1_V47'~.yeajI:fsV_, _0.r;_C:
Beth R/'A'9f.;'. Kafpakpam v11I_age,
Taluk: Bidar. : Appellants
[By Sri. Advocate}
I 1'
;--. The DV1vIs'Io_nal Manager,
" . E. Uni:'ted'IndVi_a Insurance Company,
r '--D1v1s1fIn (3ff1ce, Gulbarga.
. .19-Ixarneed,
S / Allauddln Bilkere,
A' "Age: Major, R/0. Bemalkheda,
= _,_Taiuk: Humnabad, Dist. Bidar.
: Respondents
K (By STI. Manvendra Redcfy, Advocate for R 1,
Respondent No.2 served]
L74
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL FILED {US
30 (1) OF THE VVORKMEN COMEPNSATION ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:
31.12.2008 PASSED IN ‘NCA NO.22/2007 ON TEE FILE
OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER~.FOR
WORKMEN COMPENSATION, BIDAR DISTRICTIIBIDAR,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PET1TioiN-
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSAT-ION”;’f. I”
This appeal coming on forjorders_t’his.; I T.
delivered the following: ..
Though the appeal. ‘Iis’tredxtoday’.for orders, with
consent Of. sides the same is
heard on and __d:’ spo”se._dV ofi
2. This” ‘appiteald is filed by the legal
repijesentati\Ie’=paren.ts of deceased Rajkurnar who died
‘ Vduririg’th’e,oo1irse of employment, seeking enhancement
“‘VtCornriensation by challenging the award dated
3I.III?…vIII2{)()8 passed by the Labour Officer and
C inmissioner for Workmen Compensation (‘the
Commissioner’ for short) Bidar in WCA/CR/22/2007.
/,,/f
K’
the deceased workmen died on 26.12.2006.
‘V of the dictum laid down by this Court in the case
contended that such an argument of the counsel for the
appellant does not find place in the substantialpdt-nie_stion
of law and therefore, the appeal is not fit
is necessary to note in the event if notsu”ch_–substaiitial.L
question of law is framed ‘by lcolunselfVifoifitihe
appellant, it is the duty’:__of._the”-court such’
substantial questionof and__answer the sa.r_1fie,;§
6. In the case oii.Vvperi1sal of material on
record, the of law that would
arise for consideratioinis:
“Wl1ethe1′ ‘=..4v_LlC.oiij{missioner was
justified in”aW’a.vrdVing’.int.erest with effect from
30 days’ from thedate of award or whether the
l”claimants=arepentitledlto interest 30 days from
V’ de’a:thv?”.
“‘l’hev:facts and the quantum of compensation
awarddedpdby the Commissioner are not in dispute.
é
../?’«
referred to supra, the commissioner ought to have
awarded interest with effect from not
from 30 days from the date of award.
answer the substantial questi0_nHo_f 1_a\_v”mi’r1»faV011’r.V0f
Claimantsmappellants and
i) The appeia} is V ‘ ” A
ii] The c1aiii1Vants–iapj0ei’Ia12its are entitled for
§i,nt’etfe–st Cothpensaftion awarded by the
1 effect from 30 days from
tttt H of .::1:’eath.t.01:.et from 25.01.2007.
~ ‘VI’i1e.”i’:.1’resp0I1.d’ent–insurance company is
direet_ed=.t0’tieposit the compensation amount
“–ea1eu1ating the interest in terms of this
‘ordei; expeditiously.
Sfifffl
EEEDQS