Karnataka High Court
Sri Sayednijamuddinsha S/O Mohammad ... vs Sri Mahammad Sharif S/O Mahammad ... on 18 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6508
MFA No. 104175 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104175 OF 2022 (ECA)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SAYEDNIJAMUDDINSHA
S/O. MOHAMMAD JAFAR MAKANDAR,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, NOW NIL,
R/O. KORI ONI, SAVANUR,
TQ: SAVANUR, DIST: HAVERI-581118.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. HARISH S. MAIGUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. MAHAMMAD SHARIF,
S/O. MAHAMMAD JAFARSAB MAKANDAR,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. S.M.KRISHNA NAGAR,
BEHIND POWER STATION, SAVANUR,
DIST: HAVERI-581118.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,
Digitally
SHAMANUR BUILDING, C. J. HOSPITAL
signed by ROAD, NEAR VIDYARTI BHAVAN,
JAGADISH T
R DAVANAGERE-577002.
Location: ...RESPONDENTS
HIGH COURT
OF (BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADV. FOR R2;
KARNATAKA
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
06.11.2021, PASSED IN ECA.NO.04/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, SHIGGAON SITING AT SAVANUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6508
MFA No. 104175 of 2022
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the
consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for
final disposal.
2. This appeal is filed by the injured-claimant seeking
enhancement of compensation, being aggrieved by the
judgment and award dated 06.11.2021 passed in
ECA.No.4/2018 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Shiggaon,
sitting at Savanur (for short, 'trial Court')
3. Heard Sri.Harish S.Maigur, learned counsel for the
appellant and Smt.Preeti Shashank, learned counsel for the
respondent No.2-insurance company.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
trial Court has committed grave error in assessing the disability
at 10% which is contrary to the oral testimony of PW-2 Doctor
and disability certificate. He seeks to re-assess the same by
allowing the appeal.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-
insurance company supports the impugned judgment and
award of the trial Court and submits that the appellant has
sustained only two fractures and hence, assessment of
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6508
disability at 10% is just and proper and the same does not call
for modification. It is also submitted that the assessment of
wages by the trial Court is on the higher side and the same
requires to be re-assessed at Rs.8,000/- p.m. keeping in mind
the notification issued by the Central Government under the
provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, hence,
seeks to dismiss the appeal.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material available on record.
7. The material available on record indicates that on
12.11.2017 the appellant, during the course of employment,
sustained injuries and suffered fractures. In order to establish
his claim, the appellant has entered the witness box and also
examined the doctor as PW-2. On re-appreciation of oral
testimony of PW-2, wound certificate and other medical
evidence available on record, this Court is of the considered
view that it would be just and proper to assess the disability at
20% to the whole body. This Court re-assesses the wages at
Rs.8,000/- p.m. keeping in mind the wages fixed by the Central
Government under the provisions of the Workmen's
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6508
Compensation Act, 1923. Hence, the appellant is entitled to
modified compensation as under:
Rs.8,000 x 60% x 20% x 216.91 = 2,08,233/-.
The award of Rs.10,200/- by the trial Court towards
medical expenses is unaltered. Thus, the appellant is entitled to
total compensation of Rs.2,18,433/- as against Rs.1,27,332/-
awarded by the trial Court. The enhanced compensation shall
carry interest at the rate of 12% p.a. w.e.f. 30 days after the
date of accident.
8. With the above modification of the impugned
judgment and award, the appeal is allowed-in-part.
The Registry to draw the award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BSR
Ct-an
