Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 2451 Kant
Judgement Date : 28 June, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT
MFA NO.22432 OF 2013
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. DEVI, W/O. GANAPTHI GOUDA
AGE 48 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD
R/O. AGHANASHINI, TQ: KUMTA
DIST. KARWAR.
2. GANAPATI SANNA GOUDA
AGED : 58 YEARS, OCC : AGRICULTURIST
R/O. AGHANASHINI, TQ: KUMTA
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. M.D. RAFIQUE FOR SRI. S.L.MATTI, SRI. SURESH S.S.,
ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. MOHAMMAD AKBAR M. MULLAR
AGE : 48 YRS., OCC : BUSINESS
C/O. SAFE TRANSPORT
OPP: HOTEL PANDURANGA INTERNATIONAL
NH 17, KUMTA, TQ: KUNTA (UK).
2. THE MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
BRANCH OFFICE, 98A, 1ST FLOOR
GIBBS HIGH SCHOOL ROAD,
KUMTA (UK).
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.S. KOLIWAD FOR R.2. NOTICE TO R.1. DISPENSED WITH.)
2
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF THE
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, PRAYING SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.03.2012 PASSED BY WORKMAN'S
COMPENSATION COMMISSIONER AT KARWAR, IN WCAF NO.27/2010 AND
AWARD COMPENSATION AS PRAYED IN THE CLAIM PETITION BY
ALLOWING THIS APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Claimants have come up with this appeal under Section 30(1)
of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, calling in question the
award dated 14.03.2012 in WCAF No.27/2010 passed by the
Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation at Karwar.
2. Brief facts are that, one Chandrashekar Ganapathi
Gouda was working as driver in Truck bearing No. KA-47-
0588 belonging to insured - respondent No.1 Mohammad
Akbar M. Mulla and insured with the respondent No.2.
Claimants are the parents of deceased Chandrashekar
Ganapathi Gouda. It is stated that on 22.06.2010 when
the deceased was driving the offending truck from
Sankeshwar to Belagavi on N.H.4 on account of rash and
negligent driving of the lorry, it lost control and capsized
and on account of the impact, deceased died and a case in
Crime No.128/2010 was registered in Yamakanamaradi
Police Station.
3. During the claim proceedings, respondent No.1 -
insured entered appearance and filed written statement
admitting the employer-employee relationship and also
the fact that the accident resulting in death of the
deceased took place in the course of and arising out of the
employment.
4. Respondent No.2 - insurer also filed its separate
written statement denying the averments made in the
claim petition.
5. During the enquiry, claimant No.1 was examined
as P.W.1 and Exs. P.1 to P.16 were marked. The
Insurance Co. got marked the policy of insurance as
Ex.R.1.
6. Upon consideration of the materials produced and
the evidence let in, learned Commissioner answered the
points arising for consideration in favour of the claimants
and against the respondents.
7. Learned counsel for the appellants - claimants
submits that the learned Commissioner has committed an
error of law in taking the monthly wages of the deceased
at Rs.6,000/- and not at Rs.8,000/- as provided under the
Act itself. He further submits that while the Act provides
for grant of interest at 12% p.a. with effect from 30 days
after the date of the accident, learned Commissioner has
granted lower rate of interest and thereby he has
committed a serious error of law and the same is liable to
be set aside.
8. Learned counsel appearing for respondent -
Insurance Co. on the other hand submits that, learned
Commissioner on consideration of the materials produced
before him has fixed the monthly wages at Rs.6,000/-
having regard to the fact that the accident resulting in the
death of deceased Chandrashekar Ganapathi Gouda had
taken place on 22.06.2010 and therefore no substantial
question of law arises for consideration on that score. He
further graciously conceded that the statute itself has
fixed the rate of interest at 12% p.a. with effect from 30
days after the accident and therefore he submitted that
suitable order may be passed with regard to the interest
on compensation by this Court.
9. While it is true that an amendment was
incorporated to the Act enhancing the maximum notional
wages from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.8,000/- with effect from
31.05.2010 pursuant to a notification issued by the Union
Government. Learned Commissioner taking into
consideration the fact that the accident resulting in the
death of the deceased had taken place immediately after
this amendment has been brought about, has fixed the
monthly wages of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- and
therefore, I do not find any substantial question of law
arising for consideration on that score. Accordingly, I
reject the contention put forth by the learned counsel for
the appellant seeking enhancement of the compensation
by re-fixing the monthly wages to Rs.8,000/- as against
Rs.6,000/- made by the learned Commissioner.
10. There cannot be any dispute that interest
awardable on the compensation ascertained by the
learned Commissioner should be 12% p.a. with effect from
30 days from the date of the accident and not from any
subsequent date or at any lesser rate. In that view of the
matter, learned Commissioner has committed an error and
therefore, I hold that claimants are entitled to interest at
12% p.a. with effect from 30 days from the date of the
accident till the date of realization. Hence, the following :
The above appeal is allowed in part.
While maintaining the quantum of compensation, the
claimants are entitled to award of interest on the said
compensation at the rate of 12% p.a. with effect from 30
days from the date of the accident till the date of
realization.
Sd/-
JUDGE Mgn/-
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!