Karnataka High Court
Sanjeev Kumar vs Sri Akash And Anr on 3 June, 2025
Author: Ravi V Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:2811
MFA No. 201018 of 2019
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201018 OF 2019 (WC)
BETWEEN:
SANJEEV KUMAR S/O MANIK
AGE: 37 YEARS,
OCC: LABOR,
R/O: VILLAGE YADLAPUR,
TQ: & DIST: BIDAR.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI K.M.GHATE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI AKASH
S/O MADHAVRAO,
Digitally signed AGE: MAJOR,
by RAMESH
MATHAPATI OCC: GOVT. SERVANT,
Location: HIGH R/O: RAGHVENDRA COLONY,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BIDAR - 585 401.
2. SRI. JAGANATH S/O MOTIRAON
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: CONTRACTOR,
R/O: BHIMNAGAR, BIDAR - 585 401.
...RESPONDENTS
(R1 AND R2 SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:2811
MFA No. 201018 of 2019
HC-KAR
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT,
PAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND AWARD THE ADDITIONAL
ENHANCEMENT COMPENSATION OF RS.10,00,000/- ALONG
WITH INTEREST @ 12% P.A. BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD OF THE COMMISSIONER OF EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION, BIDAR AND PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND C.J.M., BIDAR DATED 15.09.2017 IN E.C.A.NO.09 OF 2016
IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Challenging judgment and award dated 15.09.2017
passed by Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Bidar
and Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Bidar, in ECA
no.9/2016, this appeal is filed.
2. Sri K.M.Ghate, learned counsel for appellant/
claimant submitted that appellant/claimant was employed as
labour by respondent no.2-Contractor to carry out work of
buildings, on daily wage of Rs.600/-. While on work at
NC: 2025:KHC-K:2811
HC-KAR
residential site belonging to respondent no.1 on 08.09.2015,
claimant came in contact with uncovered electric live wire,
sustained severe burns and fell down. Despite taking treatment
at Government Hospital, Bidar and later at Gandhi Hospital,
Hyderabad, he did not recover. Due to development of
gangrene, both his hands were amputated upto elbow joint.
Thus he lost earning capacity and claim petition was filed under
Section 10 of Employees' Compensation Act.
3. On service of notice, only respondent no.1
contested claim petition. Respondent no.2 remained exparte.
Based on pleadings, Tribunal framed issues and recorded
evidence. Claimant examined himself as PW.1 and got marked
documents as Exs.P1 to P7. Respondent no.1 examined himself
as RW.1.
4. On consideration, Tribunal held relationship of
employee and employer between claimant and respondents was
established. Even occurrence of incident during course of and
out of employment was also established.
5. It determined age of workman as 34 years,
considered monthly income as Rs.15,000/-, adopted relevant
NC: 2025:KHC-K:2811
HC-KAR
factor of 199.40 and permanent physical disability to extent of
100% and awarded Rs.14,95,500/- as loss of earning capacity.
Said amount was ordered to be paid with interest at 7.50% p.a.
from 30 days after date of incident and in default, rate of
interest was fixed @ 12% p.a. Being dissatisfied with same,
claimant was in appeal.
6. Sole ground urged was that in a claim petition
under provisions of Employees Compensation Act, Tribunal was
not justified in awarding interest @ 7.50% p.a. and awarding
interest from 30 days after date of incident was contrary to
decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shobha and others v.
The Chairman, Vithalrao Shinde Sahakari Sakhar
Karkhana Limited and others1 wherein it is held that interest
under Workmen's Compensation Act would be payable at 12%
per annum from date of incident.
7. Learned counsel submitted that substantial
questions of law framed by this Court in its order dated
01.02.2024 would not be pressed. Therefore, appeal was heard
on substantial question of law.
2022 SCC OnLine SC 308
NC: 2025:KHC-K:2811
HC-KAR
"Whether award of interest by Tribunal was
contrary to decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Shobha's case (supra) and therefore calls for
interference?
8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shobha's case (supra)
has after referring to various provisions of Employees
Compensation Act, insofar as award of interest has held
claimant would be entitled for interest from date of accident at
12% p.a.
9. In view of above, substantial question of law would
require to be answered in affirmative. Consequently, following:
ORDER
a. Appeal is allowed in part.
b. Award passed by Tribunal is modified to
extent of increasing rate of interest from
7.50% p.a. to 12% p.a. payable from
date of incident i.e., from 08.09.2015 till
deposit.
Sd/-
(RAVI V HOSMANI)
JUDGE
NB,MSR
Ct;Vk
