Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Noor Ahammed S/O Jaffar Vali on 2 February, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2400
MFA No. 21559 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.21559 OF 2012 (WC)
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BELLARY,
REP. THROUGH ITS
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR,
SRINATH COMPLEX, NEW COTTON MARKET,
HUBLI. REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S.S. KOLIWAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. NOOR AHAMMED S/O. JAFFAR VALI,
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: EX-CLEANER,
R/O: DEVI NAGAR, BELLARY,
TQ and DIST: BELLARY.
Digitally 2. SRI. BABULAL PARASRAMPURIA,
signed by
SAROJA R/O: H.U.F. ROYAL CIRCLE,
HANGARAKI
SAROJA
HANGARAKI
R, TH BUILDINGS, DIST: BELLARY,
Date:
2024.02.13 (OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING NO.KA-36/709)
16:05:58
+0530 ...RESPONDENTS
(SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT;
NOTICE TO R2 SERVED)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.30(1) OF
THE W.C.ACT 1923, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD
DATED:28.11.2011, PASSED IN WCA/CR NO.170/2007 ON THE FILE
OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN
COMPENSATION SUB-DIVISION-2, BELLARY, AWARDING THE
COMPENSATION OF RS.1,01,349/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF
12% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION AND SHALL BE DEPOSITED
WITHIN ONE MONTH FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2400
MFA No. 21559 of 2012
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.S.S.Koliwad, learned counsel for the
appellant.
2. Appeal by the Insurance Company challenging
the liability as well as quantum awarded in WCA/CR
No.170/2007 dated 28.11.2011 by the Commissioner for
Workmen Compensation (for short, 'CWC').
3. Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for
disposal of this case are as under:
3.1 A claim petition came to be filed by Noor
Ahmad on the ground that he was working under the first
respondent in a lorry bearing No.KA-36/709 as a cleaner.
On 16.09.2006 when he was proceeding from Vithalapura
Jindal factory and size-stones were being loaded in the
lorry, at about 2.00 p.m., there was leak in the diesel tank
and therefore he wanted to check up the tank. While he
was getting down from the lorry to check the fuel tank, he
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2400
fell down and suffered fracture injuries in the leg.
Therefore, he laid a claim.
3.2 Notice of the claim petition was issued and
owner appeared and admitted the fact of employer and
employee relationship, salary being paid to the claimant
and also the unfortunate incident and contended that the
lorry is duly insured and therefore Insurance Company is
liable to pay compensation.
3.3 Insurance Company filed a detailed objection
denying the entire claim petition averments.
3.4 Learned CWC after raising necessary issues,
recorded evidence of claimant. Considering the oral and
documentary evidence placed on record by the Insurance
Company and claimant, learned CWC allowed the claim
petition in part and granted compensation in a sum of
Rs.1,01,349/- with interest at 12% per annum from 30
days after the accident.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2400
4. Said judgment is in question on behalf of
Insurance Company.
5. Sri.S.S.Koliwad, learned counsel for the
appellant - Insurance Company vehemently contended
that the accident has not occurred as is contended by the
claimant.
6. He further contended that on the alleged date
of incident, the vehicle was not even operated and
therefore, Insurance Company is not liable to pay the
compensation.
7. He also contended that the quantum of
compensation awarded by the learned CWC is also on
higher side.
8. Respondents though served with notice,
remained absent.
9. In view of the rival contentions of the parties,
this Court perused the material on record meticulously.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2400
10. On such perusal of material on record,
statement made by the owner of the lorry clearly shows
that there existed employer and employee relationship
between the claimant and first respondent.
11. According to the claimant, when size-stones
were loaded and were about to transport from Vithalapura
Jindal Factory, there was leak in the diesel tank of the
lorry. To check up the same, claimant who was the cleaner
in the lorry while getting down, fell down from the lorry. At
that juncture, he suffered injury and there was fracture in
the leg.
12. The incident has been reported to the owner.
Even though there is no complaint to the police, since the
incident has taken place when the claimant was
discharging his duty, he rightly laid a claim under the
Workmen's Compensation Act which has been rightly
appreciated by the learned CWC and allowed the claim
petition in part.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2400
13. Therefore, the contentions urged on behalf of
appellant - Insurance Company that there was no
incumbent for the claimant to laid a claim is incorrect and
cannot be countenanced in law.
14. This would take this Court to the next question
as to whether the quantum of compensation awarded by
the learned CWC is just and appropriate.
15. The learned CWC has taken into consideration
the relevant aspects of the matter namely salary being
paid and disability has sustained by the claimant and has
rightly awarded Rs.1,01,349/- as compensation which
requires no interference at the hands of this Court.
16. In view of the foregoing discussion, following
order is passed:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is meritless and hereby dismissed.
(ii) No order as to costs.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2400
(iii) Amount in deposit is ordered to be transmitted
to the learned CWC for disbursement in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SH
