Karnataka High Court
Smt. Ambujamma vs M.R.Madhukar on 28 November, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:43258
MFA No. 8367 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8367 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
1. SMT AMBUJAMMA
W/O LATE RAMESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
OCC: HOUSE HOLD WORK,
2 KUMARI. R. LAKSHMI
D/O LATE RAMESHAPA
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS
OCC: STUDENT
SINCE THE 2ND APPELLANT IS MINOR
REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN
MOTHER-1ST APPELLANT HEREIN
BOTH ARE R/AT DOOR NO.685/5
RAJAPPANA THOTA, SRIRAM EXTENSION
NITUVALLI, DAVANAGERE - 577 002
...APPELLANTS
Digitally signed (BY SRI B.PURANDARA .,ADVOCATE)
by JAI JYOTHI J
Location: AND:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA 1. M.R.MADHUKAR
S/O M.K.RAJASHEKAR
MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF MADHU
TRANSPORT
R/AT DOOR NO.473,
DAVANAGERE,
OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING
NO.KA-17-17-A-4588,
2. THE MANAGER
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE: DOOR NO.823/7,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:43258
MFA No. 8367 of 2017
TILUVALLI COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR,
NEAR ARUNA TALKIES, PB ROAD,
DAVANAGERE.
POLICY NO.472100/31/2015/12538
VALID FROM 25.01.2015 TO 24.01.2016
...RESPONDENTS
(NOTICE TO R-1 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED; BY
SRI.JANARDHAN REDDY.,ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
THIS MFA FILED U/S.30(1) OF THE WORKMEN'S
COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DT.24.10.2016 PASSED ON ECA NO.123/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & 5TH
ADDITIONAL MACT, DAVANGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The LRs of the workman have filed this appeal
aggrieved by the order passed in ECA No.123/2015, dated
24.10.2016 by the 1st Additional Senior Civil Judge & V
Addl.MACT, At Davangere. They filed an application under
Section-22 of the Workman Compensation Act (for brevity
WC Act) seeking compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- for the
death of the deceased in the course of the employment.
NC: 2023:KHC:43258
2. The court below had awarded an amount of
Rs.8,88,680/-, towards loss of dependency and Rs.5,000/-
towards funeral expenses. The LRs are before this Court
aggrieved by granting of an amount of Rs.5,000/- under
the head of funeral expenses. Learned counsel had drawn
the attention of this Court to Section-4(4) of the
Employees Compensation Act. As per the same the
amount should not be less than Rs.5,000/- that doesn't
mean that above Rs.5,000/- no amounts can be granted.
It is submitted that they have spent lot of amounts
towards funeral and other ceremonies and the court below
ought to have granted a reasonable compensation.
3. On the other hand, the learned counsel
appearing for the insurance company submits that as per
Section-4(4) of EC Act, the court below had rightly granted
an amount of Rs.5,000/- as it states that is should not be
less than Rs.5,000/- and he submits that if it is the case of
the claimant that he had spent more than Rs.5,000/- he
NC: 2023:KHC:43258
should have adduced evidence in this regard and no such
evidence has been adduced by the appellant.
4. Having heard the learned counsel on either
sides, perused the entire material on record. Before going
to the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant
it is appropriate to have a look at Section-4(4) of the EC
Act, which reads as follows:
"4(4) If the injury of the [employee] results in
his death, the employer shall, in addition to the
compensation under sub-section (1), deposit
with the Commissioner a sum of [not less than
five thousand rupees] for payment of the same
to the eldest surviving dependant of the
[employee] towards the expenditure of the
funeral of such [employee] or where the
[employee] did not have a dependant or was not
living with his dependant at the time of his death
to the person who actually incurred such
expenditure;]"
5. A bare perusal of the said provision makes it
clear that the compensation towards funeral expenses
NC: 2023:KHC:43258
should not be less than Rs.5,000/- that does not mean
that maximum only Rs.5,000/- can be awarded. If
necessary evidence is adduced the court basing on the
evidence can consider the same. In this case admittedly
no evidence is adduced by the appellant and the tribunal
has awarded amount of Rs.5,000/- in consonance with
Section-4(4) of the EC Act and this Court finds no reasons
to interfere. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
i) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court
Records to the Tribunal, along with certified
copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith
without any delay.
ii) No costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JJ
