High Court Karnataka High Court

M/S United India Insurance Co Ltd vs D Jubedabi on 4 December, 2009

Karnataka High Court
M/S United India Insurance Co Ltd vs D Jubedabi on 4 December, 2009
Author: V.Gopalagowda And K.Bhakthavatsala
EN mg man mum' 0? §<;%RNATAKA AT BA;*é<;f;s;§;.{3-;ééj'}_g_,

Dated: 26th day cf August  V     

Present";

:--IN'BLE Mr.JUS'I'ICE V'».:GC?PA§;A'

HQNZBLE Di".JUSTICSE"KVf&BHAK'i'HAVATS;§LA

M.F'.A No.4535 c/:&',g;.§g?i;i2ao7(2uié7

1;: MFA N6.4536l2{}0   .  V
Between:     , '

M] s.U111ted Incifii.Ii;;sii:'za;1;ce"€,§:t>,{;2tc1§",_ 

I Fioor, Stafion Roa<d,:'_ '  . 

g..§0Sp€t_  ....  _A    

Now rapid; by Divisgionaij. 'O  _

A1,
~ {fiwner NQRKA 35 2'?03,

 " r.~»;;2" 



Tracmr,

R [ 0.Yashwanth:1agar,
Sandmr Taiuk,

Beiiary District.

{By Sri.Mahcsh R.Uppin,Ari;v:Vf{5r'E?1", V' ._   
Ownggir ::»f,Tru<:kh§arfing N9,

R} ;of&'as'hWan?hnagar,

V' 'Sa1id11r"Tai1§}s:, ' ' --._

  '$611213?    % 

Bxarzzch 

I iIni%:ee:§Zi1;:1iai3s11rance €30. Ltei,

--«   "*1? F1v.::0zi,__ i~3§ati<:s33 Road, Hespet,
A  Bisfiiet.

 RESPGNDE¥'€'§'S

V.  (;%3y S ri.AkM.Venkat&sh§ gay. far R2
   _§'€ioi;i<::c: E0 E1 ciispansesri With)

- 3&0»

,.,REs;§~Q':sz.:§Er3ni§ 



These M.F'.As are fiied under Section 3€§j("i:} ""§gf"*jhe

' Wtarktmerxs' Compensation Act against the J3;itigI1;+3f1€;__a13.d
Award éated 30/9/'E006 passes} by the Cor::{111is3;f£}i1é:1f'_"'f0:? 4_
Workmens' Cempensatiorz, DaVa:--::~a._"g<§r€:..V:  " in» 

WCA/CR/N0.4O/2006.

Th€S€ M.F.As coming on for Ei.ict§§tif1g 

the C01111; this day, Dr.Bha}{§hava€§ala, XV-Vd6IiV'er€}d"'~!;?1<_;

foilowirlgz ~
I} 9 egg». .3;

".

:3.

 

-A These two appealgé'  0116 and the
same order  dzfited   in Case
i'€0.LGD:WCA:-CE;?';_Nib:;45Q   <31' Comnlissioner for
  Davarzagere.

2.  }§"£E:'3§1C:<:',:   argumentfi and we praceed

£0 éispase 0:'  appéaiA:':;_ ¥:§§;:*' i;E1is grammar: judgxnent,

  A  Egearzagd iji1$éI appfiariiiig for the app1ican§:~m0th&r

Si;};;>:£:;,.3}tV$f -   cempensatiofi was ciaimeé on the

  g°out2d;4:_V  deaeaseci son was warking as Loader arid

" :f' "Ui'}}u{;1=3d€I'?,»}i1"1fl€I' Ffifipfiflfififli 3$\é'<3.2---0wI1::§* sf fiat: iipper, an 3

A  Rs.5,G08/-' per margth, apart fmm RS520 per fiay as

  i";sstai Bu': the Cemmissioner has fixed the earnings of the

L



deceased at lower rate of Rs.3,000/-- per month. He further
submits that 2"' respondent--owner of the tipper filed written

statement stating that the deceased was getting sa1a1*yj’of

Rs.4,000/– per month and therefore, he _

wages of the deceased may be fixed at Rys>74,00Q-,=;»pd¢;:monthit ‘w

and award compensation.

4. On the other hand, _.1earne’d:”counse1.’:for

insurance company submits ‘applicant: not
produced any record to sho’1y”that’_’itheA videceiased vyasuearning
Rs.5,000/– per month apart He further

submits thatythe’ though stated in his
objections that deceasedyvas %{:e’tting wages of Rs.4,000/- per
mouth, h§’\%_ha$. riot ‘subjected himseif for cross–eXamination

and.’-henicet.thestatement of objections filed by the owner

‘it?’regarding”Wages.?fof7’ the deceased cannot be accepted and

_ __ao’_red.jupon. ~~

5. As per Notification No. KAE 43 LMW 2001 dated 5-2-
2003 relating to loading and unloading in a warehousing,
with reference to Sector–I City Corporation areas,’
minimum wage is fixed at Rs.3,163.90. [Basic _
D.A. of Rs.1020–90). There is no disputemahout’.’th’e-jiiactoirv’-oiit
224 applied. Therefore, ends of justice
minimum wage is appiied for .

compensation. it it H’ V

6. There is no merit in «the insurance

company. On the other ._.}:_1a1’3;d,’ deceased

partly succeedvsin sheuisentitied for enhanced
compensation. A’r3;.cC’ordi1?i:g’1jf;’.thasubstantiai questions raised

are answered in uifavvour’ of the mother of the deceased

work’ In “an. ‘- ‘

the appeal in M.F.A.No.4536/2007

by the.__Vins_urance company fails and the same is hereby

1297?

‘ egeeme, i\”/1′.F:LA.No.i–26″?/2007 filed by the mother of the

(awake? as Fe’! end»-‘*d=’~ 1:~f2:–2’–9-9? 3; @;.;=ee&N’~;fQ1;x:m:

partly allowed holding that she is entitled to

“=-rii’opeeeepeeee:ien of Rs.3,54,258/– [$3166.90/2 x 224)

6

as against Rs.3,36,000/~ awarded by the CO}I1″1I!1iSSiOI1€I’~§°i”r win??? Fifi
55″””‘l5’Tg§ 44 A-Ike’?

the interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 117-2005.

and not from 12–7–2005. The amount deposited by*.fheg: V M
insurance company in this appeal be reieaseclfidi favodr of
appliearmmother. The Insurance Co3npan$fV..ie”-direcfedain * dd

deposit the balance amount with the “Co.fnmissi’of_1e1″aVV

interest within a month from toda3}%{‘~.,

V’ =

MP/ck