Smt.Shekhavva W/O Yallanagouda ... vs Rajshekhar V Kori
2021 Latest Caselaw 2691 Kant

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                       DHARWAD BENCH

              DATED THIS THE 07th DAY OF JULY 2021

                            BEFORE

            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT


                  MFA NO.103704 OF 2015 (WC)
                              C/W
                 MFA CROB NO.100065/2017(WC)


IN MFA NO.103704/2015
BETWEEN:

1.   SMT. SHEKHAVVA W/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL
     AGE:35, OCC:HOUSEHOLD,

2.   KUM. RENUKA D/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL
     AGE:15 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT,
     REP. BY HER MOTHER-NATURAL GUARDIAN
     SHEKHAVVA W/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL

3.   KUM. ROOPA D/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL,
     AGE:13 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT,
     REP. BY HER MOTHER-NATURAL GUARDIAN
     SHEKHAVVA W/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL

4.   MUTTANAGOUDA S/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL
     AGE:11 YEARS, OCC;STUDENT,
     REP. BY HER MOTHER-NATURAL GUARDIAN
     SHEKHAVVA W/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL

5.   CHIKKANAGOUDA S/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL
     AGE:10 YEARS, OCC;STUDENT,
     REP. BY HER MOTHER-NATURAL GUARDIAN
     SHEKHAVVA W/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL

6.   SMT. FAKKIRAVVA W/O CHIKKANAGOUDA PATIL
                                    2


       AGE:55 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD,

       ALL ARE R/O YATTINAHALLI,
       TQ & DIST:HAVERI.
                                                       ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.SHIVASAI M PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     RAJASHEKHAR V KORI
       AGE:50 YEARS, OCC;AGRICULTURE & BUSINESS,
       R/O VEERABHADRESHWAR NILAYA,
       A-BLOCK, 2ND CROSS, VIDYANAGAR,
       HAVERI.

2.     THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
       NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
       HUBBALLI.
                                                  ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.S. BETURMATH & SRI. F.R. GALAGANATH,ADVS. FOR R1)
(SRI. C.V. ANGADI, ADV. FOR R2)

       THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF THE WORKMEN'S
COMPENSATION ACT, 1923 PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AND MODIFY AND FIX THE LIABILITY ON
THE RESPONDENT NO.2 INSURER, ORDER PASSED IN CASE NO.WCF
NO.20/2008 IN THE COURT OF LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER
FOR    LABOUR   COMPENSATION,      AT   HAVERI   THE   ORDER   DATED
17.10.2012 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.


IN MFA CROB NO.100065/2017

BETWEEN:

RAJASHEKHAR V KORI
AGE:50 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE & BUSINESS,
R/O VEERABHADRESHWAR NILAYA,
A BLOCK, 2ND CROSS, VIDYANAGAR,
HAVERI, TQ & DIST:HAVERI-581110.
                                   3


                                               ....CROSS OBJECTOR
(BY SRI.S.S. BETURMATH & SRI. F.R. GALAGANATH, ADVS.)

AND

1.    SMT. SHEKHAVVA W/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL
      AGE:35, OCC:HOUSEHOLD,

2.    KUM. RENUKA D/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL
      AGE:15 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT,

3.    KUM. ROOPA D/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL,
      AGE:13 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT,

4.    MUTTANAGOUDA S/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL
      AGE:11 YEARS, OCC;STUDENT,

5.    CHIKKANAGOUDA S/O YALLANAGOUDA PATIL
      AGE:10 YEARS, OCC;STUDENT,

6.    SMT. FAKKIRAVVA W/O CHIKKANAGOUDA PATIL
      AGE:55 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD,

      ALL ARE R/O YATTINAHALLI,
      TQ & DIST:HAVERI-581110.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS

      THIS MFA   CROB IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF THE LEARNED LABOUR OFFICER
AND COMMISSIONER FOR LABOUR COMPENSATION, HAVERI IN WCF
NO.20/2008 AND SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
17.10.2012 BY ALLOWING THIS CROSS OBJECTIONS AND GRANT SUCH
OTHER APPROPRIATE RELIEF AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT BE
GRANTED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.


      THIS APPEAL AND CROB COMING ON FOR HEARING ON IA THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                   4


                              JUDGMENT

Parties to this proceedings namely Smt. Shekavva

W/o Yallanagouda Patil, Renuka D/o Yallanagouda Patil,

Roopa D/o Yallanagouda Patil, Smt. Fakkiravva W/o

Chikkanagouda Patil and respondent No.1-Rajashekhar V

Kori are present before the Court. Sri. Shivasai M Patil,

learned counsel for the appellants and Sri.S.S. Beturmath,

learned counsel for respondent No.1 are also present.

2. Both learned counsel submit that respondent

No.2-insurer is not a necessary party in settling the

dispute which arises out of an employment related death.

The parties submit that they have understood the terms of

compromise petition filed today under Order XXIII Rule 3

read with Section 151 of CPC and having understood the

same, they have agreed to settle the dispute.

Accordingly, they have settled the dispute and amount has

been paid by respondent No.1 to the appellants herein and

they have received the amount settled between them.

3. I am satisfied that the parties have understood

the terms of compromise petition and thereafter, they

have voluntarily decided to settle the dispute and they

accordingly filed this compromise petition. The said

compromise petition is accepted and placed on record.

Accordingly, the following:

ORDER

a) MFA No.103704/2015 is allowed in terms of the compromise petition.

b) Draw up the decree in terms of the compromise petition.

c) Compromise petition shall be made as part of the decree.

d) In view of disposal of the main appeal in terms of the compromise petition, MFA Crob No.100065/2017 is disposed of. No order as to costs.

e) Pending applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and they are accordingly, disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE JTR