Mehboobsab Dastageersab ... vs The Executive Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 2769 Kant

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                        DHARWAD BENCH

              DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY 2021

                            BEFORE

            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT


                   MFA NO.20598 OF 2009 (WC)

BETWEEN:

MEHBOOBSAB DASTAGEERSAB BEVINGIDAD
AGE:49 YEARS, OCC:COOLIE (NOW NIL)
R/O UGGARGOL, TQ:SAUNDATTI,
DIST:BELGAUM.
                                                     ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI.VISHWANATH V BADIGER, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
SHRI. RENUKA YALLAMMA TEMPLE,
AT/POST, YALLAMMANAGUDDA,
TAL:SOUNDATTI, DIST:BELGAUM.
                                                     ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.VINAYAKA S KULKARNI, HCGP)

      THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF THE WORKMEN'S
COMPENSATION ACT, 1923 PRAYING THAT THE JUDGMENT DATED
16.4.2008 IN WCA/SR NO.156/2005 PASSED BY THE LABOUR OFFICER
AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION,SUB-DIVISION-
2, BELGAUM, AT BELGAUM IN AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF
RS.41,092/- BE KINDLY MODIFIED BY ENHANCING TO RS.5,00,000/-
WITH 18% INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                       2


                                JUDGMENT

This is a claimant's appeal calling in question the

legality and validity of the award dated 16.4.2008 passed

in WCA/SR No.156/2005 by the learned Labour Officer and

Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Sub-division-

2, Belgaum (for short, 'Commissioner').

2. Brief facts are that the claimant was working as

Coolie under respondent, who is an Executive Officer of

Shri. Renuka Yallamma Temple, Yallammanagudda,

Soundatti. It is asserted by the claimant in the claim

petition that he was engaged by respondent for cutting of

trees in the land of Temple. On 21.02.2004, while the

claimant was cutting branches of a tree, he fell down and

suffered grievous injuries to his spinal cord. He has

stated that he was admitted to KIMS Hospital, Hubli from

21.04.2004 to 9.5.2004 as inpatient.

3. Before the learned Commissioner, respondent

entered appearance and filed a detailed written statement

stating that the employment of the claimant was casual in

nature and he was not regularly appointed. The

respondent has denied any liability to pay compensation

to the claimant.

4. During the enquiry, the claimant examined himself

as PW1 and he has examined one qualified medical

practitioner by name Dr. Satish D Patil as PW2 and Exs.P1

to P6 were marked. Respondent did not examine any

witness.

5. Upon consideration of the materials produced and

the evidence let in, the learned Commissioner answered

the points arising for consideration in favour of the

claimant and as against the respondent. The learned

Commissioner recorded a finding that the claimant was

aged about 53 years at the time of the accident and he

was earning monthly wages of Rs.1,200/-. He also

recorded a finding that the claimant suffered loss in the

earning capacity to the extent of 40%. Upon such

consideration, he awarded a compensation of Rs.41,092/-

with interest thereon at 12% per annum.

6. It is urged on behalf of the appellant/claimant

that the learned Commissioner has taken wages of the

claimant at Rs.1,200/- per month, which is very low and

therefore, this Court should increase the same for the

purpose of awarding compensation. It is also urged that

the learned Commissioner is not justified in taking

disability to the extent of 40% and it should have taken

the same at 50%.

7. I have given my anxious consideration to the

grounds urged on behalf of the appellant and also perused

the records.

8. A perusal of the records show that the learned

Commissioner has considered Exs.R1(1) to (4) for fixing

monthly wages of the claimant. As per Ex.R1(4), daily

wages of the claimant was increased from Rs.30 to Rs.40

by a Resolution passed by the Executive Committee of the

Temple. Accepting the same, the learned Commissioner

has fixed monthly wages of the claimant at Rs.1,200/-.

Since the finding of the learned Commissioner is based on

evidence, it is not proper for this Court to interfere with

the same.

9. The learned Commissioner has also taken into

consideration the evidence of qualified medical

practitioner (PW2), who has assessed permanent partial

disability at 20% and thereafter assessed the loss of

earning capacity at 40%. In that view of the matter,

finding of the learned Commissioner being based on

assessment made by the qualified medical practitioner

regarding physical disability and resultant loss in the

earning capacity and also on his own appreciation of the

evidence, I am of the view that it cannot be said to be

perverse and therefore, same is not liable to be interfered

with. Hence, I do not find any good ground in this appeal

to interfere with well considered award passed by the

learned Commissioner. Hence, the following:

ORDER The above appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

JTR