Karnataka High Court
Jakera Begum And Ors vs Syed Ismail And Anr on 10 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3744
MFA No. 201029 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201029 OF 2024 (ECA)
BETWEEN:
1. JAKERA BEGUM W/O LATE ASLAMA PASHA
AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
2. RAHELA BEGUM D/O LATE ASLAM PASHA
AGE: 04 YEARS,
3. HIDAYAH D/O LATE ASLAM PASHA
AGE: 02 YEARS,
APPELLANT NO. 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS,
UNDER GUARDIAN OF THEIR NATURAL MOTHER,
I.E. APPELLANT NO. 1.
Digitally signed by
SHIVALEELA
DATTATRAYA 4. HASINA BEGUM W/O JAFAR ALI
UDAGI
Location: HIGH AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
5. JAFAR ALI S/O MAHEBOOB PATEL
AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
ALL ARE R/O DASTAPUR VILLAGE,
TQ. CHINCHOLI, DIST. KALABURAGI-585307,
NOW R/O CIB COLONY, KALABURAGI-585103.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI NARENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3744
MFA No. 201029 of 2024
AND:
1. SYED ISMAIL S/O SYED RAHIMSAB
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF VEHICLE,
R/O SULEPETH, TQ. CHINCHOLI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585324.
2. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED
MAJESTIC 1ST FLOOR KALABURAGI NOOLVI,
NEW COTTON MARKET HUBLI-580029.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUBHASH MALLAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 03.04.2024 NOTICE TO R1,
DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION ACT, PRAYING TO, A) CALL FOR THE
RECORDS. B) TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 26.10.2023 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION KALABURAGI IN ECA NO.8/2022 AND ALLOW
THIS APPEAL BY REASSESSING THE APPROPRIATE
COMPENSATION. C) IN ALTERNATIVE TO REMAND THE MATTER
TO TRIBUNAL WITH A DIRECTION TO ASSESS THE
COMPENSATION PAYABLE TO THE CLAIMANTS. D) ORDER FOR
COSTS OF THIS APPEAL E) PASS SUCH OTHER DEEMS FIT IN
THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3744
MFA No. 201029 of 2024
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation
awarded by the Commissioner for Employee's
Compensation and II-Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner' for short) in
ECA No.8/2022 dated 26.10.2023.
Though this appeal stated for orders, with the
consent of both the learned counsel, the matter is taken
up for disposal.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their ranks before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are that, deceased-Aslam
Pasha was working as driver under respondent No.1 in
lorry bearing Reg.No.KA-56/1191. On 05.03.2020 while
changing the wheel of the said lorry, he met with an
accident, resulting in fatal injuries and died at the spot.
He was aged about 30 years and earning Rs.20,000/- per
month as salary. The claimants are his wife, children and
parents and they were depending upon his income. With
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3744
these reasons, claimants prayed for compensation of
Rs.20,00,000/-.
4. Respondent-insurer denied the contents of the
claim petition and prayed for dismissal.
5. From the rival contentions of both the parties,
the Commissioner had framed the necessary issues for its
determination.
6. The claimants to prove their case examined
PW.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to 16. Respondents have not
led any evidence.
7. The Commissioner had assessed the income of
the deceased as Rs.8,000/- per month on the basis of
notification dated 31.05.2010. It appears both the parties
have not placed on record before the Commissioner the
notification dated 03.01.2020, which was issued in super-
session of previous notifications. On the basis of the said
income, the Commissioner had awarded compensation of
Rs.8,56,920/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3744
annum, by the impugned judgment and award. Aggrieved
by the same, the claimants have filed this appeal.
8. This appeal is admitted to consider the following
substantial question of law:
"Whether holding that income of the
deceased as Rs.8,000/- per month in spite of
notification dated 03.01.2020 is justifiable?
9. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for
both the side. No dispute in respect of other facts and the
dispute is only in respect of income assessed by the
Commissioner.
10. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has
furnished the notification dated 03.01.2020. According to
the same, from that day onwards income has to be
considered as Rs.15,000/- per month. The said notification
is applicable to the facts of the present case. Accordingly,
the compensation has to be recalculated as under:
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3744
Rs.15,000/- x ½ x 207.98 = Rs.15,59,850/-
+ Towards funeral expenses = Rs.25,000/-
Total = Rs.15,84,850/-.
11. Thus, the claimants are entitled for
enhancement of compensation of Rs.7,27,930/- with
interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the enhanced
amount from the date of accident till its realization.
Accordingly, substantial question of law is answered and I
pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award
passed by the Commissioner for
Employee's Compensation and II-Addl.
Senior Civil Judge, Kalabuagi, in ECA
No.8/2022 is modified;
(a) The claimants are entitled for
compensation of Rs.15,84,850/- as
against Rs.8,56,920/- awarded by the
Commissioner. The claimants are
entitled for enhancement of
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3744
compensation of Rs.7,27,930/- with
interest on the enhanced amount of
compensation at the rate of 12% per
annum from the date of accident till
its realization.
(iii) The respondent No.2 - insurance
company shall deposit the said enhanced
amount of compensation with interest,
within a period of two months from the
date of receipt of copy of this order.
(iv) The findings of the Tribunal regarding
apportionment, deposit and release etc.,
are not disturbed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SDU
CT: PK
