IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE "»I. DATED THIS THE ST" DAY OF JANUARY, 2o1:e...%'i f BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NDL'6A§3'2«9[2O():_E:;f;WC) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALI.ANo.6828,<2cD~s (WC) In MFA 6§29[2006: BETWEEN: * M/s. New India Assi3._iraAI/§iI6"3:iC¥3';iLid}; Bagalur Mansion; 2""_44FIGor,_ ' Doddapete, KOIar.I)iS.tr;§Ct. ' RepreSented:by_the'-"_-«._ Sr. Divisionaflwianager,'«.'"g'*__ '-- New India Assurance Ca. "i*_.t'd,, ' Divisional OffiCe--XI, * . 1 ' Tower B|0c;ik;' 4?" Floor.,_ Livnity'Buz.ig1'ing;.,VI.C. Road,~ ---------- B'a.ngaE0re-02'; : _ APPELLANT (ByA Srii\}'a:EaS/'a iiaifipa, Advocate) iVI.'un§Vi"atna _D/--o"\!.erikatappa, «Age; 23 years, Narasapura, ' "«}V(0|ar Taluk & District. 2. Sri. Fazal Rehrnan Khan, S/o Hayath Khan, Majeed Road, Narasapura, I Ko|arTaluk. .. RESPONDENTSLEV.
(By Sri K.S. Ramesh, Adv. for R-1;
R-2 served)
This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed u’nd.er._Sect.i__on_V3O”(1)7
of Worl<rnen's Compensation Act agaiinsti,"'tl~i'e 3iJdg_n:ent"i"–~~a'n1di
Order dated 27.2.2006 passed in WCA:N'EC':'58:200.2,o'ii the f'i~!,e
of the Labour Officer and Cornrijissioiier .fo'r._ Wo:rl<,.rnen's v '
Compensation, Kolar, awarding compensation._of'~P;s.1i,,21,619/–
with interest at 12% per annum ,_a._n:d.__dir_ecting"«.t,he_appel|ant
herein to deposit the same. 2 '
In MFA 6828[2006: '~ ,
8ETwEgm;- a '
M/s. New India Assuragge Co, Ltd};
Bagalur Mansion, .2’~’9AFi’oor, =
Doddapete, Koiai’_Di.strict. . ‘
Represented bythe ‘ _ ,
Sr. Divisional Masnaiger,’ . ,
New India Assurance Co; Ltd., ‘
Diyisionalaoffice-XI, ”
Tower ,Bl’o-ck,5»-74″‘ Fl.oor,
Unity’ B(.i’i!dVin.g,’*},.’C,, ‘Road,
Bangsai’o.r_e~o2’;w_ ” APPELLANT
Sri, l\iai*ayanappa, Advocate)
A ,xS;n1t.–..]fa’lalamma
JW/’Q Venkatappa,
1″ -Age-‘:54 years,
‘.i\iarasapura,
~ « Kolar Taluk & District.
éf’:/”
2. Sri. Fazal Rehman Khan,
S/o Hayath Khan,
Majeed Road, Narasapura,
Kolar Taluk. i C’ C
(By Sri. K.S. Ramesh, Advocate for R1
R2 ~ served)
This Miscellaneous First Appeal ‘i~s’,’.i’i»l,ed uhnder-.Se_ctVi’o:n'”30′ (1) it
of Workmen’s Compensation Act algaginst the Judgment and
Order dated 27.2.2006 passed in WCAi:i_NFC’~:.57:2002i on the file
of the Labour Officer and Cc-_mmissi–o’ri.,e’r~i_for Workmen’s
Compensation, Kolar, awarding,’co-m5p;ensa’tion”of Rs.82,669/–
with interest at 12%,_per’ a,n–nu_n'”a. a–nd_ cii’r:ectii’,ig'” the appellant
herein to deposit the same. – ‘
These Miscell§a’ne,o-us””Fi_rst”-.App’e.ai’s ‘coming on for admission
this day, the Court.,d’eli::{,ered t–he’vfo–ll,o’wing:
i :7»u N “r
Misce|la’n’e_opus Fi is filed under section
30(1) of t4h,fe~Wori;meVn”s’Compensation Act against the Judgment
and dated f;27v,.2.2oosCpassed in WCA:NFC:58:2002 on the
file of. the”La:’bo”urf~Qfficer and Commissioner for Workmen’s
A’;rC’ompensation,’Klo~lar, awarding compensation of Rs.1,21,619/–
Ait”‘iéfith:”in,terest’iVat 12% per annum, seeking for reduction of the
«.V.”co’mpe§is»ati’on amount.
as/*
2. Méscellaneous First Appeal No.6828/2006 is filed under
section 30(1) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act again.s’t—..the
Judgment and Order dated 27.2.2006
WCA:NFC:57:2002 on the file of the
Commissioner for Workmen’s Comper;isati’o’n,s.V”Kolar.__”awarding”1
compensation of Rs.82,669/- with>g.interestA:a–t 12°/gi§,.”.r;1ger’
seeking for bringing down the compe”nsation amou’nt’;
3. with the consentfv:«,lear’n’ed::counsel for the
appellant as well asgthe respondents,
these matters materials placed
before the Court of these matters at this
stage. A C V 3 V.
yviiiV.’b’er:.r.e.ferred with reference to the status in
thle-.C’ot1Vrt of *C4omvnaissioner for Workmen’s Compensation.
of the claimants is as under:
The”fi.rs’t.:_respondent is’the RC owner of the Goods tempo
fbearfing Vitegistration No.KA~08/1332. The Respondent No.1 has
engaging the claimants and others for loading and
fly,
7.1 The iearned Commissioner for Workmen’s
Compensation assessing the wages of the claimant – Jaialamma
at Rs.3,000/- per month and adopting the reievanVt..__i’jact«04r~V;.tofu
153.09 since the age of the claimant was 50 years’_a’n.d
the loss of earning capacity at 30% has:vairiia’rd’ed”‘.a
of Rs.82,669/– (1,800 x 153.09 x 30/100′)….ifl_ii
7.2 The learned Commissionerassessingthe the
ciaimant -~ Muniratna at andvvadopting the
relevant factor of 225.22 0f:.:t’nA-isiiclaimant was 19
years and assessing”t«hge’ loss 0i’«V.v’ea’i*n:i’ri«t_j’catiacity at 30% has
awarded a cornpenwsatidini’Cf>’Rs;1′-,_2’12619/–~ (Rs.1,80O x 225.22 x
30/100). « ‘V i it
7.3..«}The’~Eearne*d..V:t;0rnmissi0ner has awarded interest at
12’?/9 pier. _Vai1num–.fr0rn one month from the date of accident in
both
Féeijng aggrieved by the same, the appeiiant —-
X41″-V.in*s;IrVar1~ceE-‘C0mpany has preferred these appeals seeking for
“5redt1cti_0n of the compensation amount in both the cases.
ix’
9. Learned counsel for the appellant — Insurance Company
submits that the loss of earning capacity assessed by iVear’ne’du
Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation at K V’
cases is on the higher side and seeksfto reeaslsess –the_.|.oss’ of
earning capacity.
10. Learned counsel for the respondents/claiinianltsllliln both
the appeals supports the He further
submits that the compensation_VayyalrdVe:ci liyVv.t’hTei.Commissioner is
reasonable. é ‘V
11. E records. In so far as
Jalalamma has clear|Y stated in his
evidence thfit fracture of left clavicle and
fracture II; _III ribs. Doctor has also stated in his
evid’e_n’ce. suffered by the claimant to the limb
30°/oaind whole body is 15%. Jalalamma was
_,..l’.j’w’ork-i.ng as”afiioacier/unloader. Therefore she has to lift the
‘o.bj:e-cts and has to do other incidental works. Normally
“of? earning capacity has to be assessed in relation to the
‘inju’ries suffered by the claimant. In the instant case, as stated
Q,/’
earlier claimant — Jalalamma has suffered fracture of left clavicle
and fracture of left II, III and IV ribs. Therefore taking”-,into
account of nature of injuries suffered and also the….n4ature;
occupation, she is performing, in my opinionu V’
disability of the claimant can be assessedfAat_25P/5._y
functional disability, then the loss of earning caoaci’ty
250/o. Therefore the claimant -“V”3al’alamma.V_is*feintintléedw for a
compensation of Rs.68,89O/4: L’-..1.’_,8(.’_.l)N>’V<_ 25'/V100").
12. In so far as claimant’~-“iMfui%iiratfn_a.uMisconcerned, the
doctor has that”s:he has suffered fracture
of the tenderness over the right
wrist and Am_ove’m”en_t of painful. Doctor has also stated
his. ev-fiiirljfenicfe that thelCi’isability suffered by the claimant to the
the whole body is 10%. Claimant –
f””‘~”MuniratAli.aV king as a loader/unloader. Therefore she has
the heavy objects and has to do other incidental works.
‘N’or’rn.al»iy loss of earning capacity has to be assessed in relation
Vto.the__.injuries suffered by the claimant. In the instant case, as
Vfiimfs-tafted earlier claimant – i\/iuniratna has suffered fracture of the
ex
right radius and tenderness over the right wrist and movement
of wrist painful. Therefore taking into account of nature of
injuries suffered and also the nature of occupatio_n”,s’i*.s.e;. is
performing, in my opinion the functional disabil.ityiV’_*ofl’
claimant can be assessed at 20%. fIf”2’0′-3’t~._ is thely:_”fu_nct’io’na”l’.
disability, then the loss of earning capacity w_ii_lly’A”be
Therefore the claimant — Munis«ratna is”._V_e’nti.tle’d4V’VVVVfor a
compensation of Rs.81,079/4′ (.;i,8otJ’S;y5.f22Ax 2o/fiiooj.
13. The next question that:_ar,i’s:es f-or”njy»__t.;0l\sideration in
these appeals is wtiether the Enterest”‘la.irv.ardfed by the learned
Comrnissionler for W’oi”E§rnen”sv__Co.n’ipensation is proper or not ?
In this case,”–__tlie V”‘lea’r’nec,i”‘_.»s. Commissioner for Workmen’s
Compensa}tion’.has a”wa.rded interest at 12% per annum from one
n?iant.hjir.dn~. of the accident. Normally in cases of this
nature, “principles laid down by the E-lon’ble
i’:__supremeitdulrt in the case of ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY
4. .:l;.”fi\?l:i’TE$s.§/SDMOHD. NASIR AND ANOTHER reported in 2009 AIR
the interest has to be awarded at the rate of 7 1/2 %
date of filing the claim petition till date of award and
_Muniratnej are entitled for interest at 7 1/2 % from the date
10
thereafter at 12% per annum from the date of award tiil the
date of deposit. Therefore the ciaimants in both the cases are
entitied for interest at 7 1/2 % from the date of fiiingwth:e’-rfiaim
petition tiil date of award and thereafter at 12%
the date of award tiil the date of depos’:t.”i”
1)
2)
14. In view of the above discL_1ssion’,’._I pass th.e_-v_tfo’iiVotNi”rtg’
0 R
MFA 6829/2006 is aiiowed tent”pearttifrhe”compensation
amount of Rs.1,21,619/-ta’ “asawa:rded”tb_y.xthe Commissioner
for Workmen’s Compensiationjtoithe_C!aEnjén’t’- Muniratna is
reduced it
MFA 682320409 is;aiViow’e’d_::iin».part. The compensation amount
of Rs.82,6VV6’9_(;.,ag-__awa’rded by the Commissioner for
4__.V.Wori<,nft&:en's Coniipensatiéon to the ciaimant —- Lialaiamma is
reduced to? Rs.t~6_8,890/-.
T’heV”i..:irain’1e’nits’flzinvii both the appeals viz., Jaialamma and
fiiing the ciaim petition tili the date of award and
~therea–fter at 12% per annum from the date of award tiil the
…ie’déte”of:deposit.
egg
11
4) The excess amount, if any shaft be refunded to the Insurance
Company in both the appeals.
5) Claimants in both cases are entitied to
compensation amount in terms of thisjudgment..-j7
gss/- –