Karnataka High Court
Minakshi And Ors vs C. Narashi Road Wings And Anr on 4 September, 2024
Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6634
MFA No. 200855 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 200379 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200855 OF 2019 (ECA)
C/W
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200379 OF 2019(ECA)
IN MFA NO.200855/2019:-
BETWEEN:
1. MINAKSHI W/O BALASAHEB SALUNKE,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
2. SUPRIYA D/O BALASAHEB SALUNKE,
AGE: 17 YEARS, OCC: EDUCATION,
3. SANKET S/O BALASAHEB SALUNKE,
AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: EDUCATION,
Digitally signed
by SUMITRA
SHERIGAR 4. SONALI D/O BALASAHEB SALUNKE,
Location: HIGH AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: EDUCATION,
COURT OF (MG/ REP. BY APPELLANT NO.1)
KARNATAKA
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
DOBALE GALLI, BIJAPUR-586101.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. KOUJALAGI CHANDRAKANT LAXMAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. C. NARASHI ROAD WINGS,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF VEHICLE
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6634
MFA No. 200855 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 200379 of 2019
ITS NO.MH-13/R-5962,
BEHIND GANESH HIGH WAY ROAD,
SOLAPUR, AT SOLAPUR,
TQ: DIST: SOLAPUR-413007.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
S.S. ROAD, VIJAYAPURA-586101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDHARSHAN M. ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 30(1) OF EC ACT, PRAYING
THAT THIS HON BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO CALL FOR
THE RECORDS AND TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 03.09.2018 PASSED IN E.C.A.NO.07/2014 ON THE FILE
OF THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND COMMISSIONER OF EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION,
VIJAYAPURA AT VIJAYAPURA, AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL TO
GRANT THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY RS.44,000/- ONLY AS
CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT
AND ORDER FOR COSTS OF THIS APPEAL.
IN MFA NO.200379/2019:-
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
S.S. ROAD, VIJAYAPURA-586101.
PRESENTLY REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
SUPER MARKET, KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SUDHARSHAN M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MINAKSHI W/O BALASAHEB SALUNKE,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6634
MFA No. 200855 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 200379 of 2019
2. SUPRIYA D/O BALASAHEB SALUNKE,
AGE: 17 YEARS, OCC: EDUCATION,
3. SANKET S/O BALASAHEB SALUNKE,
AGE: 15 YEARS, OCC: EDUCATION,
4. SONALI D/O BALASAHEB SALUNKE,
AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: EDUCATION,
ALL ARE RESIDING
AT DOBALE GALLI,
BIJAPUR-586101.
(RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 ARE MINORS U/G OF
RESPONDENT NO.1)
5. C. NARASHI ROAD WINGS,
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: OWNER OF VEHICLE NO.MH-13/R-5962,
BEHIND GANESH HIGH WAY ROAD,
SOLAPUR-413 001.
AT SOLAPUR, TQ. AND DIST. SOLAPUR,
MAHARASTRA STATE.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI C. KAOUJALAGI, ADV. FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 30(1) OF EC ACT, PRAYING
THAT THIS HON BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO CALL FOR
THE RECORDS IN E.C.A NO.07/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND COMMISSIONER FOR
EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, VIJAYAPUR AND SET ASIDE
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.09.2018 PASSED IN
E.C.A NO.07/2014 BY THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION
ACT, VIJAYAPUR AND ETC.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6634
MFA No. 200855 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 200379 of 2019
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)
The following substantial questions of law that arise
for consideration in this appeal :-
i) Whether the Commissioner for Workman
was justified in coming to the conclusion
that the Insurer would be liable to pay
compensation when the deceased was
admittedly a spare driver ? and
ii) Whether the Commissioner for Workman
was justified in computing the monthly
income of the deceased `5,000/- in
contravention of Explanation-II of
Section 4(1) of the Employee's
Compensation Act, 1923 ?
2. The case of the claimants that the husband of
first claimant was employed by first respondent and he
had fallen ill while driving the truck on 19.11.2005 and the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6634
employer i.e., the first respondent had sent a spare driver
to get the vehicle back to solapur and during the course of
this travel, the husband of the first claimant, Balasaheb
who was not well, passed away. They therefore made a
claim contending that the deceased had died during the
course of his employment and therefore they were entitled
for compensation. The Commissioner for workman has
accepted this claim and has awarded a sum of
`4,56,225/-, by holding that he was drawing a monthly
wage of `5,000/-.
3. The Insurer is in appeal contending that it could
not have been made liable since the accident occurred due
to the ill health of the deceased and not as a result of the
use of the motor vehicle. It is also contended that the
determination of the income at `5,000/- was contrary to
the Explanation -II of Section 4(1) of the Employee's
Compensation Act.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6634
4. The claimants on the other hand contend that
the sum awarded by the Commissioner for workman was
inadequate.
5. It is not in dispute that the Insurer had issued a
policy which not only covered the risk of a motor vehicle
accident, but also covered the liability of the employer vis-
à-vis the provisions of the Employee's Compensation Act
to the extent of four employees. In the light of the fact
that the liability under the Employee's Compensation Act
was covered under the policy by the Insurer, the argument
that it was not liable to pay compensation cannot be
accepted.
6. It is to be noticed here that it was not in
dispute that Balasaheb, the deceased had passed away
during the course of his employment and therefore there
is no merit in the contentions advanced by the Insurer.
The question of law insofar as this aspect is accordingly
answered against the Insurer.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6634
7. The accident of the year 2005 the
Explanation-II to Section 4(1) of Employee's
Compensation Act which was in existence at that point in
time, clearly stipulated that if the monthly wages of a
workman exceeded `4,000/-, it was deemed that the
monthly wages was only `4,000/- for the purpose of
Section 4(1)(a) and 4(1)(b) of the Employee's
Compensation Act. In this view of the matter, the
Commissioner for workman could not have come to the
conclusion that the deceased was entitled to be paid
compensation on the premise that he was earning
`4,000/-. Consequently, it is held that the claimants would
be entitled to sum of `3,56,980/- (`2,000/- x 178.49). The
claimants would also be entitled interest at the rate of
12% per annum from the date of the accident till the date
of the payment.
8. In terms of the above the appeal filed by the
Insurance i.e., M.F.A.No.200379/2019 is allowed in part
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6634
and the appeal filed by the claimants i.e., M.F.A.
No.200855/2019 is dismissed.
9. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be
transferred to the Tribunal for disbursal in terms of the
award.
Sd/-
(N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)
JUDGE
SN
CT: VD
