Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager, vs Kallappa on 24 March, 2021
Author: N.K.Sudhindrarao
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO
M.F.A.No.24713/2012(WC)
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
N.K.COMPLEX, KESHVAPUR,
HUBLI
REPRESENTED BY
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
HUBLI. ..APPELLANT
(BY SRI.A.G.JADHAV, ADVOCATE THROUGH VC)
AND:
1. KALLAPPA
S/O MUKAPPA GADIGOL
AGED 42 YEARS
OCC: DRIVER
R/O: HOSA SIDENUR TALUK,
BYADAGI
DIST: HAVERI
2. SHRI.NIRANJAN
S/O PARAMESHWARAPPA DESAI
AGE: MAJOR
OCC: BUSINESS
R/O: MASANAGI TALUK,
2
BYADAGI,
DIST: HAVERI. ..RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.S.BAWAKHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-1,
NOTICE TO R-2 HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED
29.09.2016)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30 OF THE
WORKMEN COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.11.2011 PASSED IN
WCA/NF/22/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER
AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN COMPENSATION,
HAVERI DISTRICT, HAVERI, AWARDING THE
COMPENSATION OF RS.1,49,932/- TO BE DEPOSITED
WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER AND
INTEREST @ 12% P.A. TO BE DEPOSITED AFTER 30 DAYS
TO THE ACCIDENT.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though the matter is listed for admission, with the
consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties,
appeal is taken up for final disposal.
2. Appeal is directed against the Judgment and
award dated 28.11.2011 passed in W.C.A/NF/No.22/2011
wherein the Commissioner granted compensation of
Rs.1,49,932/- with interest @ 12% p.a.
3. The substance of the case is that on 18.10.2010
petitioner/claimant was driving Autorickshaw bearing
No.KA-25/TK-1975 and going from Haveri to Motebennur
and due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by him
it dashed against the bridge and he sustained injuries and
upon claim petition being presented was awarded
compensation of Rs.1,49,932/- and the insurance company
has come in appeal.
4. The main grounds urged are there is no
relationship of `employer' and `employee' and that the
petitioner did not carry badge.
5. Learned Commissioner was accommodated with
oral evidence of PW-1 and documentary evidence Exs.P-1-
FIR and complaint, P-2-Charge sheet, P-3-Mahazar, P-4-
Wound Certificate, P-5-M.V.Report, P-6-Licence, P-7-
Disability Certificate, P-8-X-rays and Exhibits R-2-1-Policy,
R-2-2-Copy of Notice issued to R-1, R-2-3-Postal receipt.
6. Learned counsel Sri.A.G.Jadhav for appellant-
insurance company submits there is no relationship of
`employer' and `employee' and petitioner has not
produced document to show the relationship and also did
not possess licence.
7. Learned counsel for respondent No.1
Sri.S.S.Bawakhan would submit that licence is filed before
the Commissioner as Ex.P-6.
8. Though non-wearing of Badge is alleged, no
materials are produced. As such the claim petition lacks
substantial question of law.
In the circumstances, appeal is rejected. Judgment
and award dated 28.11.2011 passed in
W.C.A/NF/No.22/2011 by Commissioner, Workmen
Compensation, Haveri is confirmed.
Insurance company is directed to pay the amount
together with interest. However deduction shall be given
to the amount if any already deposited.
Amount in deposit if any be transferred to the
jurisdictional Commissioner for Workmen Compensation.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SBN
