Karnataka High Court
T.Rajesh Naik @ Satish Naik vs M/S.Khandewal Molassess And Bulk ... on 28 May, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7082
MFA No. 102200 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102200 OF 2019 (WC)
BETWEEN:
T. RAJESH NAIK @ SATISH NAIK S/O. THIPPESWAMY NAIK,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCC: EX-LORY DRIVER,
R/O. CHIKKAJOGIHALLI THANDA, KUDLIGI TQ,
NOW AT CARE OF GIVINDA NAIK, BELGAL THANDA,
BELGAL POST, BALLARI TQ AND DIST: 583101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT.KEERTHI G.K. FOR SRI.M.AMAREGOUDA, ADVS.)
AND:
1. M/S. KHANDEWAL MOLASSESS & BULK CARRIER
(P) LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, OWNER OF THE LORRY
BEARING NO.KA-53/9875, #25, 2ND MAIN, 3RD CROSS,
VALEMPURI VINKAYA TEMPLE STREET ROAD,
DODDA BANASWADI, BANGALORE-560043.
2. M/S. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO.
LIMITED, BY ITS MANAGER, ROMAN HOUSE,
Digitally signed
by SHIVAKUMAR H.R.PAREKH MARG, 169, BACKBAY
HIREMATH
Location: HIGH RECLAMATION, MUMABI-400020.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. NAGARAJ C. KOLLOORI, ADV. FOR R2,
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 12.12.2018, PASSED IN E.C.A. NO.879/2014, ON THE FILE
OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BALLARI, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
ACT FILED UNDER SECTION 10.
THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7082
MFA No. 102200 of 2019
JUDGMENT
The claimant has filed this appeal under Section 30(1) of
the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 to modify the
judgment and award dated 12.12.2018 passed by the II
Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ballari, in E.C.A. No.879/2014
and to enhance compensation at Rs.7,92,475/-.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as they referred to in the claim petition.
3. The brief facts of the case of appellant are as
under:
The claimant was working as a driver in lorry bearing
registered No.KA-53/9875, as per the directions of 1st
respondent, on 07.10.2013 at 04:30 p.m., the claimant
suddenly lost control over the vehicle and the vehicle turtled
near Siddapur cross, Kikkeri - Mandagere road, Kikkeri Hobli,
K.R.Pet Taluk. As a result of which, the claimant sustained
grievous injuries. Hence, this led to registration of FIR and
investigation. Hence, the claimant filed E.C.A. No.879/2014
before the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ballari, wherein, the
Trial Court considering an oral and documentary evidence on
record, granted compensation of Rs.2,07,525/- with interest at
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7082
the rate of 12% per annum from the date of accident till its
realization. Aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by
the Trial Court, the claimant has filed this appeal.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and
respondent - Insurance Company.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
the appellant was working as a driver of lorry and earning
Rs.12,000/- per month and Rs.250/- per day as bata from the
1st respondent, but the Trial Court has not considered this
aspect. However, it has considered the income as Rs.6,000/-
per month, without any basis. The Trial Court has not properly
awarded compensation on all heads. The claimant has partial
permanent disability to an extent of 45%, but the Trial Court
has considered the disability at 15% only to the whole body.
Therefore, the Trial Court has failed to award adequate and
reasonable compensation. Hence, prayed to allow the petition.
6. Learned counsel for the insurance company
contended that the Trial Court has fairly granted compensation
under all heads and has passed well reasoned order. Thus, it
requires no interference. Hence, prayed to dismiss the appeal.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7082
7. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the
parties and perusing the judgment and award of the Trial
Court, it appears that, there is no dispute with regard to the
injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident
that occurred on 07.10.2013 due to turtle of lorry and the
liability of insurance company. The only point that would arise
is quantum of compensation.
8. As per the evidence led by the parties, as on the
date of the accident, the age of the claimant was 24 years.
Admittedly, the claimant has not furnished any proof in respect
of his income. Hence, the Tribunal has taken the notional
income at Rs.6,000/- per month, which is not proper. The
accident is of the year 2013. Hence, notional income has to be
taken at Rs.8,000/-. If Rs.8,000/- notional income is taken into
consideration and if 40% is deducted from the total income,
then it comes to Rs.4,800/-. If Rs.4,800/- is multiplied by
218.47 X 15 ÷ 100 then it comes to Rs.1,57,298/-. Hence, the
claimant is entitled for compensation under the head pain and
suffering (loss of income) for a sum of Rs.1,57,298/- as against
Rs.1,17,131/- awarded by Tribunal. Further, the Tribunal
awarded a compensation of Rs.90,394/- under the head
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7082
medical expenditure, which is reasonable one and hence, no
interference is called for in that regard. Thus, the claimant is
entitled for the following compensation:
Pain and suffering (Loss of income)
Rs.1,57,298/-
(Rs.8,000 - 40% X 218.47 X 15 ÷ 100)
Medical expenditure Rs.90,394/-
Total Rs.2,47,692/-
Less: Compensation awarded by Trial Court Rs.2,07,525/-
Balance Rs.40,167/-
9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The
claimant is entitled for additional compensation of Rs.40,167/-
with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.
The respondent - Insurance Company is directed to
deposit compensation amount within eight weeks from the date
of receipt of copy of this judgment.
On deposit of the entire amount, the Trial Court is
directed to release entire amount in favour of the claimant on
proper identification.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RSH/ct-an
