6. It was submitted while passing impugned judgment
at Rs.7,000/- only. It was further submitted, award of interest
from one month after date of accident was also contrary to law.
question of law would arise for consideration.
7. On other hand, Sri Sanjay M.Joshi, learned counsel
8. Heard learned counsel and perused impugned
9. Appeal was admitted to consider following
"Whether assessment of compensation by
Tribunal is contrary to law especially
Notification issued under Section 4 of E.C.Act
and Ex.P13?"
NC: 2025:KHC-K:2789
HC-KAR
10. And with consent of learned counsel for parties, it is
taken up for final disposal.
11. This appeal is by claimant seeking for enhancement
of compensation. Relationship of employee, employer and
insurer between appellant, respondents no.1 and 2 are not in
dispute. Occurrence of accident on 13.06.2015 involving
insured vehicle, claimant sustaining injuries leading to
permanent physical disability and consequent loss of earning
capacity as well as liability of insurer to pay compensation are
not in dispute. Grievance of claimant is about assessment being
contrary to law and material on record.
12. Insofar as monthly income, claimant had asserted it
to be Rs.15,000/- per month and Rs.100/- per day as bhata but
denied by employer. Admittedly, accident occurred on
13.06.2015, which is after issuance of notification by Union
Ministry of Labour and Employment in S.O.1258 (E) on
31.05.2010, stipulating `8,000/- as monthly wages under
Section 4(1B) of E.C. Act, for purposes of Section 4(1) thereof.
Therefore, Commissioner/Tribunal would not be justified in
taking monthly income at `6,000/-. This Court has in
NC: 2025:KHC-K:2789
HC-KAR
innumerable matters held same to be mandatory. Therefore,
assessment would be contrary to provisions of E.C. Act.
13. Likewise, in view of ratio laid down by Hon'ble
Supreme Court in case of Shobha and others v. The
Chairman, Vithalrao Shinde Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana
Limited and others1 interest under Employees Compensation
Act would be payable at 12% per annum from date of incident.
Therefore, award of interest from one month after date of
incident would also be contrary to law.
14. Insofar as contention about assessment of
compensation towards loss of earning capacity being contrary
to material on record, it is seen claimant alleged that he
sustained blunt injury to his abdomen resulting in intestinal
injury and for which he underwent laparoctomy. Due to same,
he claimed to be suffering from 15% permanent physical
disability. To substantiate same, he relied on treatment
records, medical bills, prescription, scan reports, etc., issued by
Yeshodhara Hospital, Solapur as Exs.P8 to P12. However, same
were got marked noting objections about proof of contents.
2022 SCC OnLine SC 308
NC: 2025:KHC-K:2789
HC-KAR
Admittedly, claimant did not examine any official from
Yeshodhara Hospital, Solapur, to prove contents. PW.2-
Dr.S.S.Bedar, examined by claimant did not treat claimant. In
cross-examination (certified copy of which was made available
by learned counsel for claimant for perusal by this Court), he
admitted Ex.P13, disability certificate was issued two years
after date of accident by referring to treatment records issued
by Yeshodhara Hospital and without any fresh clinical or other
examination/test. He also admitted that injury to abdomen had
healed. Suggestions about assessment being excessive are
denied.
15. While passing impugned award, Tribunal assessed
loss of earning capacity at 10% as against 15% by PW.2. When
assessment of permanent physical disability by Tribunal is on
due consideration of documentary and oral evidence and by
assigning reasons, same would not be open for challenge on
ground of perversity. Moderation of assessment by Tribunal
was taking note of admissions by PW.2. Therefore, assessment
of permanent physical disability would not call for interference.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:2789
HC-KAR
16. Thus, re-computation of compensation towards loss
of earning capacity would be as follows:
Rs.8000/- X 60% X 211.79 X 10% = Rs.1,01,659.2/-.
17. Award of Rs.1,29,618/- under other heads is
undisturbed. Thus, total re-assessed award would be
Rs.2,31,277.2/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from
date of accident. Substantial question of law is answered partly
in affirmative. Consequently, following :
ORDER
(a) Appeal is allowed in part.
(b) Claimant is entitled to 2,31,277.2/- along with
interest @ 12% per annum from date of accident
i.e., 13.06.2015 till deposit of amount.
(c) Respondent-insurer is directed to deposit
enhanced compensation within six weeks from
date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.
(d) Rest of order passed by Tribunal remains
unaltered.
Sd/-
(RAVI V HOSMANI)
JUDGE
MSR
Ct;Vk
