Karnataka High Court
Smt Lalitha W/O Basappa vs Sri Ramanagouda S/O. Naganagouda ... on 20 July, 2021
Author: P.Krishna Bhat
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JULY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT
MFA NO.101501/2017 (WC)
C/W.
MFA.NO.102027/2017
IN MFA NO 101501 OF 2017:
BETWEEN
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
REGIONAL OFFICE 2ND FLOOR
ARIHANTH PLAZA, KUSUGAL ROAD, HUBBALLI
NOW REPRESENTED BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICER REGIONAL OFFICE,HUBBALLI
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI RAJASHEKHAR S ARANI. ADV.)
AND
1 . SMT. LALITHA W/O BASAPPA @ BASAVARAJ KAPPANAIKAR
AGE:22 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE
R/O. GUDAGOOR VILLAGE,TQ:RANEBENNUR
DIST:HAVERI
2 . KUM CHAITRA D/O BASAPPA
@ BASAVARAJ KAPPANAIKAR
AGE:2 YEARS SINCE MINOR
R/BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN NEXTFRIENDMOTHER
SMT.LALITHA W/O BASAPPA @ BASAVARAJ KAPPANAIKAR
R/O. GUDAGOOR VILLAGE
TQ:RANEBENNUR DIST:HAVERI
3 . SRI RAMANAGOUDA
S/O NAGANAGOUDA PATIL
AGE:64 YEARS,OCC:BUSINESS
2
R/O 4TH CROSS, VAGEESH NAGAR
NEAR ADISHAKTI TEMPLE
RANEBENNUR, DIST:HAVERI
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.HANUMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADV. FOR R1 & R2;
R2 IS MINOR R/BY R1; R3 SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION
ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:15.02.2017,
PASSED IN ECA.NO.9/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE IIND ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, RANEBENNUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.13,37,000/-
WITH INTEREST AT 12% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS
REALISATION.
IN MFA NO 102027 OF 2017 :
BETWEEN
1 . SMT LALITHA W/O BASAPPA
@ BASAVARAJ KAPPANAIKAR
AGE:22 YEARS
OCC:HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE
R/O GUDAGOOR VILLAGE
TQ:RANEBENNUR
DIST:HAVERI
2 . KUMARI CHAITRA D/O. BASAPPA
@ BASAVARAJ KAPPANAIKAR
AGE:11 MONTHS
SINCE MINOR REPTD BY
HER NATURAL GUARDIAN NEXT FRIEND MOTHER
SMT LALITHA
W/O. BASAPPA @ BASAVARAJ KAPPANAIKAR
APPELLANT NO.1
R/O GUDAGOOR VILLAGE
TQ:RANEBENNUR
DIST:HAVERI
OCC:HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE
3
R/O GUDAGOOR VILLAGE
TQ:RANEBENNUR, DIST:HAVERI
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. HANUMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADV.)
AND
1 . SRI RAMANAGOUDA S/O. NAGANAGOUDA PATIL
AGE:64 YEARS,OCC:BUSINESS
R/O. 4TH CROSS
VAGEESH NAGAR
NEAR ADISHAKTHI TEMPLE
RANEBENNUR,
TQ:RANEBENNUR
DIST:HAVERI
2 . THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
REGIONAL OFFICE 2ND FLOOR
ARIHANTA PLAZA
KUSUGAL ROAD
HUBBALLI-580023
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S ARANI, ADV. FOR R2;
R1 HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION
ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:15.02.2017,
PASSED IN E.C.A.NO.9/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
4
JUDGMENT
These appeals are at the instance of the claimant
and insurer calling in question the award dated
15.02.2017 passed in ECA.No.9/2016 by the II Addl.
Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT, Ranebennur.
2. Brief facts are that one Basappa @ Basavaraj
was driver of lorry bearing registration No.KA-04/C-9313
owned by respondent No.1/Ramanagouda Naganagouda
Patil and insured with National Insurance Company Ltd.,.
On 8/9/2015 while Basappa @ Basavaraj was driving the
lorry in question an accident took place and he died due
to the injuries suffered. A case in Crime No.121/2015 was
registered in Kumar pattanam police station, Haveri
District in connection with the accident.
3. In the proceedings before the learned Court
below, respondent No.1/Insured filed written statement
admitting employer and employee relationship and
respondent No.2/Insurer contested the proceedings by
filing written statement denying the material averments
made in the claim petition.
4. During the enquiry, claimant No.1 examined
herself as PW.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to 17. Respondent
No.2 examined one of its officials as R.W.1 and policy of
insurance was marked as EX.R.1.
5. The learned Court below after appreciation of
the material placed before him and the evidence let in
allowed the petition and awarded compensation of
Rs.13,37,000/- with interest thereon at 12% P.A.
6. Sri.Rajasekhar S Arani, learned counsel for
insurer submits that the learned Court below has
committed serious error of law in taking the monthly
wages of the deceased at Rs.12,500/- per month. In
support of his contention, he invited my attention to the
maximum cap fixed on the notional monthly wages of a
workman for the purpose of calculating compensation
under the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 and
submitted that the learned Court below could take only
monthly wages of Rs.8,000/- and in this particular case,
the learned Court below having taken the same at
Rs.12,500/- per month has committed an error. He
therefore, submits that the award is liable to be modified
to the said extent.
7. Sri. Hanumanthreddy Sahukar, learned counsel
appearing for the claimants contended that it is well
settled law that for the purpose of calculating wages
which the workman was earning, both the components
namely the wages and bhatta which the workman was
receiving has to be added up and the total amount has to
be regarded as wages for the purpose of calculating the
compensation. He therefore submits that monthly wages
taken by the learned Court below at Rs.12,500/- per
month is correct in the eye of law and therefore there is
no ground to interfere with the same.
8. I have given my anxious consideration to the
submissions made on either side and I have perused the
records.
9. There is no doubt about the fact that the
learned Court below has perused the entire records and
based on the material available before it, has recorded
the finding that the deceased was earning wages at
Rs.8,000/- per month and Rs.4,500/- by way of bhatta. It
is also well settled that while calculating the wages within
the meaning of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923
both the components, namely, wages that the workman
was receiving and bhatta which he was receiving from the
employer are required to be added up. However, it is also
to be noted that after adding up of the bhatta if the wages
per month is above Rs.8,000/-, only Rs.8,000/- will have
to be taken as the monthly wages of the workman for the
purpose of calculating the compensation in view of the
fact that the Statute itself by way of amendment on
31.05.2010 has fixed the cap at Rs.8,000/- per month.
10. In view of the above indisputable position of
law, the learned Court below was not justified in taking
monthly wages of the deceased at Rs.12,500/- but it
should have taken at Rs.8,000/- per month only.
Accordingly, the compensation which the claimants are
entitled to receive will have to be recalculated as follows:
8,000x50%x209.92=8,39,680/-
Thus, the claimants are entitled to compensation of
Rs.8,39,680/- as against Rs.13,12,000/- awarded by
the learned Court below.
Apart from the same, the learned Court below has
awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards funeral
expenses and the same is not interfered with in the
facts and circumstances of the case. Thus the
claimants are entitled to award of total compensation
of Rs. 8,39,680/- + Rs.25,000/- = Rs.8,64,680/- which
shall carry interest at the rate of 12% p.a. with effect
from 30 days from the date of the accident till date of
deposit.
Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) MFA.No.101501/2017 is allowed in part.
MFA.No.102027/2017 is dismissed.
ii) The claimant is entitled to compensation of
Rs.8,64,680/-/- with interest at 12% P.A. with effect from
30 days from the date of the accident till the date of
deposit.
iii) The amount in deposit, if any shall be
transmitted to the concerned learned Court below along
with records.
iv) The excess amount, if any shall be refunded to
the appellant/insurance company in MFA.No.101501/2017.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VB/-
