Karnataka High Court
Mahaboob Bee And Anr vs Krishana Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd And Ors on 9 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:425
MFA No. 201489 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201489 OF 2017 (WC-)
BETWEEN:
1. MAHEBOOBIR W/O RAJASAB
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD
2. RAJASAB S/O BAWASAB BOOBLI
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
BOTH ARE R/O. GALAG VILLAGE,
DEVADURGA, DIST: RAICHAUR.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KRISHANA BHAGYA JALA NIGAM LTD.,
Digitally signed
by BHEEMARAYANAGUDI VILLAGE, SHAHAPUR
KHAJAAMEEN L DIST: YADGIR, BY ITS CHJIEF ENGINEER-585287.
MALAGHAN
Location: High 2. RAMESH S/O DEVEGOWDA
Court of
Karnataka AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: CONTRACTOR
R/O. HASAN DIST: HASAN.
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
NRBC DIVISION NO.1
RODALABANDA, TQ: LINGASUGUR
DIST: RAICHUR-584122.
4. D Y UPPAR
AGE: 55 YEARS,
CLASS 1 CONTRACTOR,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:425
MFA No. 201489 of 2017
R/O VIJAYAPUR-586101.
5. CHANNABASAPPA @ CHANNAMALLAPPA,
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: CONTRACTOR
R/O GALAG VILLAGE,
TQ: DEVADURGA DIST: RAICHUR-584129.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANJY M. JOSHI, AD.F FOR R1 AND R3; V/O DATED:
22.08.2023 NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH; R4 ANDR5
ARE SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.30(1) OF WC ACT, PRAYING TO
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25-06-2010,
PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER FOR WSORKMEN S
COMPENSATION AND LABOUR OFFICER, RAICHUR, IN THE FILE
BEARING WCA CR NO. 37/2002, AND ENAHNCE THE
COMPENSATION AT RS. 3,00,000/- IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The present appeal is filed by the claimants
aggrieved by the award passed in WCA No.37/2002, dated
25.06.2010, by the Commissioner for Workmen's
Compensation And Labour Officer Raichur.
2. The claim petition was filed seeking
compensation of an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- for the death
of the deceased in the accident. According to the employer
NC: 2024:KHC-K:425
the deceased was paid a salary of an amount of
Rs.3,000/- per month, the court below had taken the
income as Rs.2,600/- p.m., and by applying the multiplier
had granted compensation. When it comes to the interest
the court below had granted interest one month after the
incident. The appeal was admitted on the following
substantial questions of law:
i) Whether the Commissioner was justified in
awarding the compensation taking income
of the deceased at Rs.2,600/- p.m., instead
of Rs.3,000/- p.m., as claimed in the claim
petition?
ii) Whether the commissioner was justified
considering the income of the deceased at
Rs.3,000/- p.m., instead of Rs.6,000/- as
per Central Government Notification?
iii) Whether the court was justified in awarding
the interest from one month after the
incident and it ought to have been from the
date of the accident?
NC: 2024:KHC-K:425
3. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant
submits that as per the notification the income should
have been taken at Rs.4,000/- p.m., but the court below
had taken Rs.2,600/- and further the claimants are
entitled for interest from the date of the accident and not
after one month of the accident. On these two grounds the
award passed by the court below is not a well-considered
order.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents
submits that the case of the appellants' is that the
employer is paying an amount of Rs.3,000/-, in that case
the question of taking Rs.4,000/- p.m., as income even as
per the notification does not arise. It is submitted that the
award passed by the Tribunal is reasonable and no
grounds are made out for enhancement.
5. Having hearing the learned counsel on either
side, perused the entire material on record. First coming to
the aspect of income. According to the claimants the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:425
employer is paying an amount of Rs.3,000/- p.m., as per
the notification it is Rs.4,000/- p.m., hence this Court is
taking the income as Rs.3,000/- and since the deceased
was a bachelor 50% of the said amount is deducted,
therefore Rs.1,500/- is the income and the multiplier is
226.38. The claimants are entitled for an amount of
Rs.3,39,570/- (Rs.1500 x 226.38) towards loss of
dependency. As rightly contended by the learned
counsel for appellant the interest on the compensation
would have to be calculated from the date of the accident.
6. Accordingly, the appeal of the claimants is
Partly Allowed by enhancing the compensation from
Rs.2,94,294/- to Rs.3,39,570/- along with interest at
12% p.a., from the date of the accident till the date of
realization.
i) The compensation amount shall carry interest
at 12% p.a. from the date of petition till the
date of realization.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:425
ii) The respondent - insurance company shall
deposit the amount within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the
judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is
entitled to withdraw the entire amount without
furnishing any security. The Insurance company
is at liberty to recover the same from the owner
of the vehicle.
iii) 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.
iv) No costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
Judge
JJ
