Karnataka High Court
Bangalore Electricity Supply ... vs Smt Vyshali M C on 2 June, 2023
Bench: K.Somashekar, Rajesh Rai K
-1-
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF JUNE, 2023
PRESENT
HON'BLE JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
AND
HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4533 OF 2018 (WC)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7084 OF 2018 (WC)
IN MFA NO.4533 OF 2018
BETWEEN
BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED,
(BESCOM),
E-4, MAHADEVAPURA SUB - DIVISION,
BENGALURU - 560 048,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
ASSITANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE),
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H.V DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SMT. VYSHALI. M.C.,
W/O LATE MUNIRAJU. M,
PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
-2-
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
2. KUM. BHUVANASHREE,
D/O LATE MUNIRAJU.M,
PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS,
3. KUM. GAGANASHREE,
D/O LATE MUNIRAJU.M,
PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS,
4. MASTER MAHESH,
S/O LATE MUNIRAJU.M,
PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS,
RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 BEING MINOR
REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER
NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. VYSHALI M.C.
5. SRI. MUNIYAPPA,
S/O LATE HONNURAPPA,
PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
6. SMT. MANGAMMA,
W/O LATE HONNURAPPA,
PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT NEAR GANGAMMA TEMPLE,
MARAGONDAHALLIL VILLAGE,
T.C. PALYA POST,
K.R. PURAM HOBLI,
BENGALURU - 560 036.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.R.CHANDRAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R6;
( R2-R4 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY R1 ))
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF WORKMEN'S
COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 28/02/2018, PASSED IN ECA. NO.147/2015, ON THE
FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXVII
-3-
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
ACMM., BENGALURU (SCCH-11), AWARDING COMPENSATION
OF RS.21,26,752/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.
IN MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
BETWEEN
1. SMT. VYSHALI. M.C
W/O LATE MUNIRAJU.M
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
2. KUM. BHUVANASHREE
D/O LATE MUNIRAJU.M
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS,
3. KUM. GAGANASHREE
D/O LATE MUNIRAJU.M
AGED ABOUT 08 YEARS,
4. MASTER. MAHESH
S/O LATE MUNIRAJU.M
AGED ABOUT 06 YEARS,
5. SRI. MUNIYAPPA
S/O LATE HONNURAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
6. SMT. MANGAMMA
W/O LATE HONNURAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
APPELLANT NOS. 2 TO 4 ARE MINOR
REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. VYSHALI.M.C
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
NEAR GANGAMMA TEMPLE,
MARAGONDAHALLIL VILLAGE,
T.C. PALYA POST,
-4-
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
K.R.PURAM HOBLI,
BANGALORE - 560 036.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. CHANDRAKUMAR R, ADVOCATE)
AND
BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD.,
(BESCOM), E-4, MAHADEVAPURA SUB - DIVISION,
BANGALORE - 560 048.
REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (E)
....RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. H V DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE )
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 28/02/2018, PASSED IN ECA. NO.147/2015, ON THE FILE
OF THE I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXVII ACMM.,
BENGALURU (SCCH-11), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THESE MFAS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 25.05.2023, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT
OF JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, RAJESH RAI.K, J DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
-5-
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
JUDGMENT
These two appeals are arising out of the Judgment
and Order dt.28.02.2018 passed in ECA No.147/2015 by
the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and I Addl. Small
Causes Judge and XXVII ACMM, Bengaluru (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Trial Court').
2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant-
BESCOM in MFA No.4533/2018, i.e., the respondent before
the MACT and I Addl. Small Causes Judge and XXVII
ACMM, Bengaluru, is a company registered under the
Companies Act, owned by the Government of Karnataka
(hereinafter referred to as BESCOM). Whereas appellants
in MFA No.7084 are the claimants/petitioners in ECA
No.147/2015 before the Tribunal, who are the legal heirs
of deceased M.Muniraju (hereafter referred to as 'the
claimant')
3. It is the case of the claimants in MFA
No.7084/2018 that the BESCOM has appointed deceased
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
M.Muniraju as temporary Gangman and after completion
of six years, the Company has converted the job of said
deceased Muniraju who was the employee under the
BESCOM (as probationary Mazdur and after satisfaction of
his three years service, the BESCOM-Company has
merged the said Muniraju as Junior Lineman vide order
dated 19.06.2009 and thereafter, he was working as
Junior Lineman and drawing a salary of Rs.24,173/- p.m.
It is the further case of the claimants that at the request
of staff of the Company, on 13.11.2014, at about
8.00 p.m., while he was on duty, as per the instruction of
Junior Engineer of the Company, went to attend the
complaint along with other Lineman one D.T.Gopalaiah.
Thereafter, they attended the complainant at NGEF Estate,
then they went to attend another complaint at Priyaraj
Electronics, bearing RR No.E4HT-165, power conversion
1x750 and at that point of time, the deceased Muniraju
found that there was a break in the HT jump and HT fuse,
then at about 10.20 p.m., the he contacted F15, Hudi
Station through phone and requested to clear the same
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
and thereby, after obtaining L.C.No.137 and confirmation
given by the Junior Engineer who was with him about the
clearance and after doing the formalities, the deceased
climbed the electric pole with the help of a ladder and
then, started to repair the defect in the HT fuse. When
such being the position, all of a sudden, due to current
shock, the said Muniraju fell to earth from the Electric pole
and he has sustained head injuries and multiple injuries to
his whole body. The said information was communicated
to the relative and thereafter, he was shifted to Vydehi
Institute of Medical Science at Whitefield and after
examination, the doctors have declared that said Muniraju
was brought dead. Hence, a claim petition in ECA
No.147/2015 made by the legal heirs of the deceased
Muniraju, i.e., wife, three children and parents, viz.,
appellants in MFA No.7084/2018 under Section 22 of the
Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, by claiming
compensation. However, the said petition was opposed by
BESCOM. To prove the case of the claimants, before the
Trial Court, they examined two witnesses as P.W.1 and
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
P.W.2 and also got marked eight documents, i.e., Exs.P1
to P8. The respondent/BESCOM also examined one of its
officer as RW.1 and got marked five documents as Ex.R1
to R5. The Tribunal, on appreciation of the evidence and
the material on record, partly allowed the claim petition
filed by the petitioners/claimants and thereby, granted a
compensation of Rs.21,26,752/- with 12% interest from
the date of petition till its realization.
4. Aggrieved by the said award, the respondent-
BESCOM preferred MFA No.4533/2018 to set aside the
Judgment and Award dated 28.02.2018 and to dismiss the
claim petition filed by the petitioners/claimants. However,
the petitioners/claimants also preferred MFA
No.7084/2018 to modify the award dated 28.02.2018 and
thereby seeking to enhance the compensation amount
awarded by the Tribunal.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. Learned counsel for BESCOM vehemently
contended that the MACT was not properly guided by the
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
principles governing the award of compensation in the
case of death under the provisions of Workmen's
Compensation Act. The said award was passed by the
Tribunal without considering the evidence and material on
record. The death of the deceased Muniraju was caused
only due to the negligence on his part without considering
the report of the electrical Inspector as per Ex.R1. As per
the said report, the deceased failed to take safety
measurements by wearing helmet and safety belt while
attending the work. As such, the award passed by the
Tribunal is totally arbitrary. He would further contend that
the Tribunal was not justified in passing the award without
deducting the amount already paid by BESCOM, i.e., a
sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and other terminal benefits.
Accordingly, the learned counsel prays to allow MFA
No.4533/2018 and to set aside the award. He relied on
the Judgment passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in MFA No.8577/2017 c/w.3269/2016 and MFA
No.6310/2016.
- 10 -
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the claimants
in Appeal No.7084/2018 contended that the Tribunal is not
justified in awarding only a sum of Rs.21,26,752/- as
compensation since the deceased was aged about 43
years at the time of his death and he was earning a salary
of Rs.24,173/- p.m., and he was the sole bread-winner of
the family. Due to the untimely death of the deceased,
the appellants were put to untold hardship and injustice.
The Appellant Nos.2 to 4 are the minor children of the
deceased. They lost their love and affection from their
father. Hence, though the claimants claimed a
compensation of Rs.40,00,000/-, the Tribunal granted a
meagre compensation of Rs.21,26,752/- without
considering the facts and circumstances of the case. As
such, the learned counsel prays to allow the appeal filed in
MFA No.7084/2018 and thereby, to modify and enhance
the compensation amount granted by the Tribunal.
8. We have bestowed our anxious consideration both
on the arguments advanced by the parties and also the
- 11 -
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
materials/evidence available on record including the Trial
Court records.
9. In view of the submission made by the learned
counsel appearing for the parties, we have formulated the
following substantial questions of law which are to be
answered in this appeal:
i) Whether the findings recorded by the
Tribunal that the death of the deceased was
during and in the course of employment?
ii) Whether the Tribunal is justified in holding
that there is no negligence on the part of the
deceased while discharging his duty?
iii) Whether under facts and circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was justified in awarding
compensation of Rs.21,26,752/- with interest at
the rate of 12% p.a., to be payable by the
BESCOM ?
- 12 -
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
10. We have carefully considered the findings
recorded by the Tribunal and perused the records.
11. It is not in dispute that the claimants in MFA
No.7084/2018 are the legal heirs of the deceased late
Muniraju. So also, the said Muniraju was the employee of
respondent/BESCOM as on the date of incident. Even
otherwise, the said aspect was not disputed by the
respondent/BESCOM. However, as far as the death of the
deceased is concerned, though the respondent/BESCOM
admitted that the same was caused during the course of
employment due to the current shock while repairing the
defect in HT FUSE at Priyaraj Electronics, RR No.E4HT-165
power conversion 1x750 KVA, nevertheless the BESCOM
alleged that the same was caused due to the negligence of
the said Muniraju, without considering the report of the
Electrical Inspector as per Ex.R1. According to the
BESCOM, Ex.R1-report clearly depicts that the said
Muniraju had failed to take safety measures while
discharging his duty, which amounts to his own negligence
- 13 -
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
on the alleged incident. On careful perusal of Ex.P1 to
Ex.P6, i.e., complaint and other documents produced by
PW.1 in her evidence clearly depicts that based on the
complaint of one Muniyappa as per Ex.P1 an unnatural
death report was registered on 14.11.2014 in UDR
No.89/2014 and during the course of investigation, the
jurisdictional Police conducted the inquest proceedings and
the spot mahazar wherein clearly stated that the deceased
died due to current shock during the course of attending
the electric work in the station. Hence, by perusal of
Ex.P1 to P6, it is clear that the death of deceased Muniraju
was on account of electric shock and the same was during
and in the course of employment. Therefore, the
respondent-BESCOM is liable to pay compensation to the
claimant. It is settled principle of law that in order to
succeed in an application for getting of compensation
under the Act, the following points are required to be
established:
- 14 -
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
i) The accident must arise out of and in the
course of workman's employment.
ii) There must be nexus between injury-death
and the accident and work done in the course
of employment.
iii) Claimants have to prove that the deceased
was doing a part of his duty or incidental
thereto, resulted in the accident.
12. Having applied the aforementioned factors to the
case on hand, the deceased Muniraju met with the electric
shock on 13.11.2014, at about 8.00 p.m., while he was on
duty. Nevertheless, he attended the said duty/repair work
as per the instruction of Junior Engineer of the Company,
and attended the complaint along with other Lineman one
D.T.Gopalaiah. Later, they went to attend another
complaint at Priyaraj Electronics, bearing RR No.E4HT-
165, power conversion 1x750 KVA and at that point of
time, the deceased Muniraju found that there was a break
in the HT jump and HT fuse. Then at about 10.20 p.m.,
- 15 -
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
the he contacted F15, Hudi Station and requested to clear
the same and thereby, after obtaining L.C.No.137 and
confirmation given by the Junior Engineer who was with
him about the clearance and after doing the formalities,
the deceased climbed the electric pole with the help of a
ladder and then, started to repair the defect in the HT
fuse. When such being the position, all of a sudden, due
to current shock, the said Muniraju fell to earth from the
Electric pole and he has sustained head injuries and
multiple injuries to his whole body. The said information
was communicated to the relative and thereafter, he was
shifted to Vydehi Institute of Medical Science at Whitefield
and after examination, the doctors have declared that said
Muniraju was brought dead.
13. Accordingly, the first and second substantial
questions of law framed are answered in favour of the
claimants, i.e., appellants in MFA No.7084/2018.
14. As far as the award of compensation amount is
concerned, though the learned counsel for the claimants
- 16 -
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
vehemently contended that the Tribunal failed to consider
the relevant factors and evidence on record and thereby,
granted a very meagre compensation, nevertheless, the
counsel for BESCOM also contended that the management
of the Company has provided a job to the wife of Muniraju
on compassionate ground vide Order dated 19.08.2015
and she has been working as a Junior Assistant at the
office of the Assistant Executive Engineer and drawing a
salary of Rs.24,173/- p.m., as per Ex.P8-the salary
certificate produced by PW.1. Further, the Tribunal also
awarded Rs.5,000/- under the head of funeral expenses.
In such circumstances, there is no provision to grant
additional compensation to the claimants as per the EC
Act.
15. On cursory glance of the evidence and the award
passed by the Tribunal, the Tribunal granted
Rs.21,21,752/- under the head of loss of dependency as
per Ex.P8 and by virtue of Schedule-IV of EC Act, the
factor considered at 175.54 and an amount equal to 50%
- 17 -
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
of the deceased multiplied by the relevant factor. Hence,
it comes to Rs.24,173/- - 50%, i.e., 12,087/- x 175.54 =
Rs.21,21,752/-. Further, Rs.5,000/- is granted under the
head of funeral expenses as provided under Section 4 (iv)
of the EC Act. Hence, in our considered opinion, the
Tribunal rightly awarded the compensation of
Rs.21,21,752/- to the claimants who are the legal heirs of
deceased Muniraju.
16. On evaluation of the evidence on record and the
above facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find
any merit in the arguments advanced by both the counsel.
Accordingly, we answer Substantial Question No.(iii).
17. In that view of the matter, we are of the
considered opinion that the Tribunal is just and proper in
awarding the compensation and accordingly, we do not
find any merit in the submission made by the learned
counsel for the appellants and respondents in both the
appeals either to enhance the compensation or to set
aside the award. Hence, we pass the following:
- 18 -
MFA No. 4533 of 2018 C/W
MFA NO.7084 OF 2018
ORDER
Both the appeals filed by the claimants in MFA
No.4553/2018 and by BESCOM in MFA No.7084/2018, are
dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
BNV
