Karnataka High Court
Sunil vs Sri Putte Gowda on 20 February, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:7226
MFA No. 3072 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3072 OF 2014 (WC)
BETWEEN:
1. SUNIL
S/O JAYARAM
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
MINOR, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER
AND NATURAL GUARDIAN
SMT PARVATHAMMA
BOTH R/A NO.24, 1ST MAIN
1ST CROSS, KAMALANAGAR
BANGALORE-560079
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. R SHIVU REDDY., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI PUTTE GOWDA
S/O HANUMAIAH
Digitally AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
signed by
BHARATHI S PROPRIETOR
Location: M/S MANJUSHREE PRINTERS
HIGH COURT NO.9/2, 1ST G CROSS
OF
KARNATAKA 8TH MAIN, 3RD STAGE
4TH BLOCK, BASAVESHWARANAGAR
BANGALORE-560079
...RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF W.C.ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT DATED 28.8.2012 PASSED IN WCA.NO.WOB-
1/ECA/NFC/CR 23/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND
COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN COMPENSATION, SUB DIVISION-1,
BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING FURTHER ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:7226
MFA No. 3072 of 2014
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. The above appeal is filed by the workman challenging the
judgment dated 28.08.2012 passed in WCA No.WOB -
1/ECA/NFC/CR 23/2011 by the Labour Officer and
Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Sub Division - 1,
Bengaluru1.
2. The parties will be referred as per the rank before the
Commissioner.
3. Claiming compensation for the injuries sustained during the
course of his employment, the claimant filed a petition under
Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act2 arraying the
employer as a respondent. The employer entered appearance
before the Commissioner and contested the case of the
Workman. The Commissioner, upon appreciation of the oral and
documentary evidence on record has allowed the petition
filed by the Workman and awarded a compensation of
Hereinafter referred to as the Commissioner'
Hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'.
NC: 2024:KHC:7226
`66,670/-. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed by the
workman seeking for enhancement of compensation.
4. This Court by its order dated 18.12.2021 has admitted the
above appeal and framed the following substantial question of
law:
(i) Whether the learned Commissioner has
adopted the correct principles of law in
computing the compensation awarded?
5. It is forthcoming from the records of the Commissioner
that the workman had stated that when the claimant was
carrying out of his employment with the employer he sustained
the accident, wherein there was traumatic amputation of right
great toe at its proximal phlynx level and second toe at middle
phalanx level part hanging by flexor tendon. The medical
records discloses that the surgery of the distal phlynx of the
right toe of the middle phlanx level part has been done. The
Doctor has been examined who has stated regarding the
treatment undertaken which discloses that the workman was
treated as an in patient for two days. He has further stated
that the workman has disability at 13% to the whole body.
NC: 2024:KHC:7226
6. The workman has examined himself and has stated that he
had joined the employer as a helper and during the course of
the said employment injuries were sustained. The employer
who is the proprietor of the Respondent has examined himself
and has stated that the injured is a minor and they came inside
the printing press and meddled with the printing equipments,
as a result of which, the injuries have been sustained.
7. The Commissioner has appreciated the oral and
documentary evidence and has assessed the income at `500/-
per month and further noticing the injuries has awarded a total
compensation of `66,670/- assessed the income of `1,716/-,
applied the relevant factor of 228.54 and assessed the loss of
earning capacity at 17% and accordingly awarded
compensation.
8. It is forthcoming that the claimant is a 13 year old boy and
is represented in the proceedings by his mother. Further, the
Commissioner has adequately appreciated the oral and
documentary evidence on record and awarded compensation.
9. Upon re-appreciation of the same and having regard to the
fact that scope of consideration as contemplated under Section
NC: 2024:KHC:7226
30 of the Act, wherein the Judgment of the Commissioner can
be interfered with only on a substantial question of law, the
Appellant has failed in demonstrating that the judgment of the
Commissioner is liable to be interfered with by this Court in the
present appeal.
10. In view of the same, the following
ORDER
i) The appeal is dismissed.
ii) The Judgment dated 28.08.2012 passed in
WCA No.WOB - 1/ECA/NFC/CR 23/2011 by the
Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen
compensation, Sub Division - 1, Bengaluru is
affirmed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BS
