Karnataka High Court
Shankaregowda vs Bhanuprakasha C N on 22 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:15956
MFA No. 9261 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9261 OF 2017 (WC)
BETWEEN:
1. SHANKAREGOWDA
S/O. SWAMYGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.
2. SHANTHAMMA
W/O. SHANKAREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
PUTTANAHOSAHALLI VILLAGE
MALLIPATTANA HOBLI
ARAKALAGUDU TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT.
...APPELLANTS
Digitally signed by
MOUNESHWARAPPA
NAGARATHNA (BY SRI PRAKASHA H. C., ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AND:
1. BHANUPRAKASHA C. N.
S/O. NINGEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
RESIDING AT CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE
KATTAYA HOBLI
HASSAN TALUK & DISTRICT.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:15956
MFA No. 9261 of 2017
2. UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
MUMBAI-100 059
REPRESENTED BY VEHICAL INSURANCE POINT
2ND FLOOR, LAKSHMI COMPLEX
OPPOSITE B.S.N.L. BHAVANA, B.M. ROAD
HASSAN-573 201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B. C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE, FOR R-2, AND
R-1: NOTICE DISPENSED WTH VIDE ORDER
DATED 2-12-2022)
***
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEE'S COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 3-10-2017 PASSED IN
E.C.A. NO.6 OF 2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
J.M.F.C., AT ARKALGUD, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the claimants aggrieved by the
judgment and award dated 3-10-2017 passed in E.C.A.
No.6 of 2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and
Judicial Magistrate First Class, at Arkalgud, whereby, the
Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.8,90,438/- as compensation
along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from
29-10-2015 till its realisation.
NC: 2024:KHC:15956
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition
before the Tribunal.
3. The claimants, being the parents of Sri B.S.
Dileep (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased'), filed a
petition under Section 3 of the Employee's Compensation
Act, 1923, claiming compensation of Rs.20 lakh inter alia
contending that the deceased was working as a driver of
TATA Safari Dicor car, bearing Registration No.KA-13
M-6259, under respondent No.1 and earning a salary of
Rs.15,000/- per month. As per the instructions of
respondent No.1, on 29-9-2015 at 4:15 p.m., the
deceased was driving TATA Safari Dicor Car from Arkalgud
to Holenarasipura on the left side of the road in front of
Hemavathi School, Holenarasipura Road, the right back
tyre of the car got busted and the car was toppled, as a
result, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and was
taken to Government Hospital, Arkalgud, for treatment
NC: 2024:KHC:15956
and later, while shifting to Hospital at Hassan, on the way
he succumbed to the injuries.
4. The Tribunal considering the material available on
record, awarded compensation of Rs.8,90,438/-. Being
aggrieved by the award passed by the Tribunal, the
claimants filed this appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants
submits that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the wages
of the deceased at Rs.8,000/- per month when
unchallenged testimony of the claimants is that the
deceased was paid Rs.15,000/- per month as wages.
Hence, he prayed to allow the appeal.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance
Company submits that the Tribunal has granted fair and
reasonable compensation on account of the death of the
deceased. He further submitted that no grounds are made
out for seeking enhancement of compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC:15956
7. As there is no dispute regarding the death of the
deceased in a road traffic accident, relationship of the
owner and the driver of the TATA Safari Dicor car and the
liability of the insurer of the vehicle, the only point that
arises for my consideration in the appeal is:
"Whether quantum of compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it
call for enhancement?"
8. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for
the parties and perusing the judgment and award of the
Tribunal, I am of the view that the Tribunal has rightly
taken the notional income of the deceased at Rs.8,000/-
per month in the absence of proof of income and awarded
just and reasonable compensation with interest at the rate
of 12% per annum from 29-10-2015 till its realisation.
Hence, there is no merit in the appeal.
NC: 2024:KHC:15956
The appeal, being devoid of merits, is accordingly
dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KVK
