High Court Karnataka High Court

Divisional Manager United India … vs Roshan Beig on 19 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Divisional Manager United India … vs Roshan Beig on 19 September, 2008
Author: N.Ananda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT  A' 

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY 01:' SEP'I'EMB.E_R "'fiOG8"~ 2 MA " "

BEFORE
THE HOIWBLE MR.w_sfr1cm;.}xhiAND A'_%A f ' V' "
M.?.A.No.27341:»3§G5 {WC}---._'  V' 

BETWEEN: V 

Divisional Manager   _ ._ 

United India insurance Co. Ltd.  
Divisional Office   _     '
M.M.K.Comp1ex , Akkamahadeizé E29-ad'_--.._ ' 
P.J.Exte:1sion,    V   " 
New rep. by its R'-,:«gi{;:::.':;.:¥'1_'_._   _  '

United ¥ndiaI13:fe1t£xe;'g:ce (",4o._ I;t(_:i.A_ 

Regionaiiyififfice,  Builciing
# 25, M.G»;-Road V '    
Banga1ore--5'E3Q O()1.' H  .- V   Appcliant

 (By Sxjiyfxjftxa  Sézamy 85 S.R.Murthy, Advocates}

?95'hé'fl.'£'~¢ig-
*-[S/(2-.v Eeig
. New  about 25 years

 Road, Macianapalli Town
C§:1iit":_)or District, A.P.

*  S-'Q/0. Abdui Khader
No.14--483, Upstairs, Ganéhi Read
Madanapalli Town
Chittsor District, A11'.  Respondents

‘ (33; Sri V.?.I{u1kan1i, Advcxzate :2): R1; R’2–Servic6 of notice

dispensed with.)

{ii} against the death of or bodily inju1*3=~~-t:d_A’VV:.__’__i’ ”

any passenger of a public sezvice vehicie CE11iiS’:C€3i=.V: “‘

by or arising out cf the use of .t}:1.x:_4vt:1:.i£:iei’ 4′

pubfic place:

Provided that a policy’ shaii not . 2 i K

(i) to cover 1iés;pec”:t_

death, axésing 0111: of and i_<i;v~f his
employment, of . eni:})19#i«féé._V_ .i3:if~._a gtzisiin
insured by the po1iicy{o1%'. bodily
Si1St3jh,1f;fi by"'s'uéii axising

out of {Sf h_is._eiLj:ii0yment other

ti1a1:1"'a–. " ziiidszi the W0rk3:11e11's~

(8 of 1923), in respect
of tlimg <':1r:Vai1r;.V.V_<i;i1',:.'A'::~:f'"};z§ii1i;Iy injury to, any such

emgoloyéc -f"

V ga) e£1gag;cj§i__irx driving the vehicle, 03:

it is a public service Vehicle engaged

” as »–.;;:o£ic§u£:.t0r of the vehicle or in axamining

‘ii:ii::kt:1i;s;.i:11e Vehicie, or

(cyiif it is a goods carriage, being carried in

T th¢=:’vréL11i<;:1i:, or

in V. _ i(i_F.) to cover any contractual liability."

4. According to proviso to section 147 of’A« 3;:l:’1e. M
Véthicles Act, 1988, the ins11ra:1ce:”é6I11P3.fi3;f
indemnify the insured in respect of
W0rk1ncn’s Compensation Act, sjor
bodily ézmjuxy to any such’ 4:*§p10},{;e:£’:*; .’ V4

a) engaged in (iriviliig the u

b) if it is a public_ scgikiéé’ as a
conducter cf tickets on the

vehicle, or

C) if it isfva c_:arrie£i in the vehicle,

(ii) to §§<;s(éfi1v.a1iy._(,;G:1ii%aii:'u1a1 liabifity."

«V }9§é-.niiff§ad1y,vV"ifi the case on hané, claimant was

ivofk_iJ1€g The ciaimaxzt was being calfied in the

vehiélg in .1'-b.e'_ "{::i2T12~se of his employment. Therefore, in View of

"-'~__ pmviso ."L«:,)[i~3€(:1";*:.()13; 14'? of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the

V'1'1':i7u,s'.:1_1§§v;ce company cannot be pt:1mitte€i to contend that it is

K liable to pay c0mpe11sat:i0n. fig
4;? ,4;

z ..

g’\L M9’/'” ‘

9, in my considcmd opinion, having regard to the
nature :25’ §I1_iurics, rézsiclual effects and avocation of
it would be appropriate to d€ts::nI1:i11e ”
disability vis-érvis loss cf staining capacity V–

<:laima11t is entitled to compensation cif»§$'.'1«,-€_¥6«,8 1; _

19. I1: is seen from the i1<npugnéd_"awa1*d;,..;11:¥;érc§st':';iN
granted after 30 days fmm the of aét:idéi3;i; xfifiqich is

conumy to {I16 law laid d€)%'i?i§1A_iI1 .rep019iék1"z;n 2007'

AIR SCWvV1'265[.V.ft?1 tFAz§?:c§3s'é.QfViVaif§§fi£if' Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.
Mubasir the Supreme Ccnirt has
h€1d:- V' % V% L

&_ __°''{ 13) W6IkmE11'S Compensafiona Act (8 of
' V. (3) (as amended by Amending Act 14»
' .1i'9S}'5§?Vf;';§j2npensafion–Intcrcst-By Amending
amended fixing minimum rate of

V iiitsfésth' 12% – Acmident took piace after
.A am.cmr§111ent ~– Rate of inteztst of 12% as fixed by
u Court is proper — Hewever, starting point
for award of interest is on completion of 0211::

T manth from date on which compensation
becomes due 331:1 not finm date of accident «- No

imiicatiola of date as to when it becomes du _«-~ It
g i

-av-«-

N v_ M

has to be taken to be (late of acijudicati3on.«..cfV:VV’V’:”:’~c.. “-<

ciaim."

1 1. In View of the above, I passirhue ‘fe11;_)V2;;?jiI1g«:
ORDER V ‘TT T

T he appeal is accepted iii is
modified. Comperxsafion I'<'s.&:§3;'".'c.'().;2,-1"".«7'-,,e*'cc_– awfl3rc1ec1.v~V§1)y' the
Commissioner for Worlfiaeeiifs' is reduced to
R's.1,46,81}/– w:vithV'i1;tereei:"$a1':V}2§/6«.V:per on the :said
sum fmm (a{i_r_;' -Que." the date of
awand), the -~ If insurance company has

deposited cf what has been awarded by

this the slinall be refunded to the insurance

the nest of the amount in deposit shafl

¥3e._V'1M1_';:.a;I1"s":£'"e*£'1we_ti'~:;"'iio the Commissioner for Workmetfs

V _ Com}e)"en.sa:ti031"Ve1t Chitradurga. Ofiee is directed to send back

" tixe reeexeieaioxzg with a copy <1-{this order.

saI-

jufikle

SNN