Allowed

United India Insurance Co. Ltd, v. Narayana, Anr.

Karnataka HC10 Jul 2012MFA/30416/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka condensed delay in five motor accident cases and disposed of appeals filed by an insurance company against workmen's compensation awards. The Court allowed the appeals and modified the compensation amounts awarded to the claimants.

What did the court decide?

Modifications to the quantum of compensation awarded in five separate cases. The remaining statutory benefits remain confirmed.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd, Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JULY 2012

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.S.INDRAKALA

¶6

MFA No.30417/2008 C/W

¶7

MFA Nos.30415/2008, 30416/2008, 30418/2008 & 30419/2008

¶8

IN MFA No.30417/2008

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Manager, Raichur By Divisional Office United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V.V. Suhani Complex Gandhi Chowk, Raichur By its Manager

¶11

.. Appellant

¶12

(By Sri. R.V. Nadagouda, Adv.)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Mareppa, Age: 23 years S/o Rangappa, Ex-Loader R/o Kavithala, Manvi Taluk Dist. Raichur

¶15

Mukthar Ahmed, Age: Major S/o Nazeer Ahmed

¶16

¶17

¶18

R/A Ward No.24, Door No.27 Zanda Katte, Bellary

¶19

.. Respondents

¶20

(Notice to respondents held sufficient vide C/O dated 05.12.2011, Sri. Basavaraj R. Math, Adv. for R1 [VK filed on 19.12.2001])

¶21

This MFA is filed under Section 30(1) of W.C. Act, against the judgment and award dated 25.04.2008 passed in KAR/NFP/CR.No.1001/07 on the file of the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Raichur, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation of Rs.1,50,258/with interest @ 12%.

¶22

IN MFA No.30415/2008

¶23

BETWEEN:

¶24

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Manager, Raichur By Divisional Office United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V.V. Suhani Complex Gandhi Chowk, Raichur By its Manager

¶25

.. Appellant

¶26

(By Sri. R.V. Nadagouda, Adv.)

¶27

AND:

¶28

Gowranna, Age: 22 years S/o Basappa, Ex-Cleaner R/o Kavithala, Manvi Taluk Dist. Raichur

¶29

¶30

¶31

Mukthar Ahmed Age: Major S/o Nazeer Ahmed R/A Waard No.24, Door No.27 Zanda Katte, Bellary

¶32

.. Respondents

¶33

(Sri. Basavaraj R. Math, Adv. for R1, Service of notice held sufficient In respect of R2 vide C/O dated 10.07.2012)

¶34

This MFA is filed under Section 30(1) of W.C. Act, against the judgment and award dated 25.04.2008 passed in KAR/NFP/CR.No.999/07 on the file of the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Raichur, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation of Rs.1,87,610/with interest @ 12%.

¶35

IN MFA No.30416/2008

¶36

BETWEEN:

¶37

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Manager, Raichur By Divisional Office United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V.V. Suhani Complex Gandhi Chowk, Raichur By its Manager

¶38

.. Appellant

¶39

(By Sri. R.V. Nadagouda, Adv.)

¶40

AND:

¶41

Narayana, Age: 23 years S/o Ramappa, Ex-Loader R/o Kavithala, Manvi Taluk Dist. Raichur

¶42

¶43

¶44

Mukthar Ahmed Age: Major S/o Nazeer Ahmed R/A Ward No.24, Door No.27 Zanda Katte, Bellary

¶45

.. Respondents

¶46

(Sri. Basavaraj R. Math, Adv. for R1, Service of notice in respect of R2 is held sufficient vide C/O dated 10.07.2012)

¶47

This MFA is filed under Section 30(1) of W.C. Act, against the judgment and award dated 25.04.2008 passed in KAR/NFP/CR.No.1000/07 on the file of the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Raichur, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation of Rs.1,50,258/with interest @ 12%.

¶48

IN MFA No.30418/2008

¶49

BETWEEN:

¶50

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Manager, Raichur By Divisional Office United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V.V. Suhani Complex Gandhi Chowk, Raichur By its Manager

¶51

.. Appellant

¶52

(By Sri. R.V. Nadagouda, Adv.)

¶53

AND:

¶54

Shivram, Age: 21 years S/o Nagaraj, Ex-Loader R/o Kavithala, Manvi Taluk Dist. Raichur

¶55

¶56

¶57

Mukthar Ahmed Age: Major S/o Nazeer Ahmed R/A Ward No.24, Door No.27 Zanda Katte, Bellary

¶58

.. Respondents

¶59

(Sri. Basavaraj R. Math, Adv. for R1, Service of notice in respect of R2 is held sufficient vide C/O dated 10.07.2012)

¶60

This MFA is filed under Section 30(1) of W.C. Act, against the judgment and award dated 25.04.2008 passed in KAR/NFP/CR.No.1002/07 on the file of the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Raichur, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation of Rs.1,26,672/with interest @ 12%.

¶61

IN MFA No.30419/2008

¶62

BETWEEN:

¶63

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Manager, Raichur By Divisional Office United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V.V. Suhani Complex Gandhi Chowk, Raichur By its Manager

¶64

.. Appellant

¶65

(By Sri. R.V. Nadgouda, Adv.)

¶66

AND:

¶67

Nagendra, Age: 23 years S/o Yankappa, Ex-Loader R/o Kavithala, Manvi Taluk Dist. Raichur

¶68

¶69

¶70

Mukthar Ahmed Age: Major R/A Ward No.24, Door No.27 Zanda Katte, Bellary

¶71

.. Respondents

¶72

(Service of notice in respect of R1 is held sufficient vide C/O dtd. 16.12.2011, Appeal against R2 is dismissed Vide C/O dtd. 16.12.2011, Sri. Basavaraj R. Math, Adv. for R1 [VK filed on 19.12.2011])

¶73

This MFA is filed under Section 30(1) of W.C. Act, against the judgment and award dated 25.04.2008 passed in KAR/NFP/CR.No.1003/07 on the file of the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Raichur, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation of Rs.1,75,258/with interest @ 12%.

¶74

These appeals coming on for further orders this day, the Court delivered the following:

¶75

JUDGMENT

¶76

Though MFA No.30415/2008 is not listed along with other four appeals, with the consent of the counsel for both the appellant-insurance company as well as respondent No.1 appearing in all the cases, the said file is also taken up for hearing.

¶77

¶78

¶79

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents in all the cases on applications filed for condonation of delay. Considering the reasons stated in the affidavits filed in support of the said respective I.A, the delay caused in filing the above appeals is condoned by allowing the said respective application in all the cases.

¶80

Though all the five cases are listed today for further orders on the interim applications, with the consent of the counsel for both the appellant-insurance company as well as the respondents-claimants in all the appeals, they are taken up together for final disposal and are being disposed of by this judgment.

¶81

With regard to the service of notice, the claimants in all the five case are duly represented by their counsel. However, with regard to the ownner-employer though in MFA No.30417/2008 the service is held sufficient, as the appellantinsurance company is only restricting its appeal with regard to the quantum of compensation and not with regard to its

¶82

¶83

¶84

liability, the service of notice on respondent No.2 who is only a formal party in all the cases is given up by the appellant.

¶85

In the decision rendered in MFA No.6624/2007

¶86

(MV) dated 08.02.2010 it is observed at para 10 as hereunder:

¶87

“10. As the maximum number of persons should be carried in a goods vehicle, as set out under the said provisions is seven, the insurance company is bound to indemnify the insured, in respect of death or injury caused to the person who was carried in the vehicle, as, in the instant case, the number of persons carried is namely, deceased Revenasiddappa, Indersingh and four other Amalies. In that view of the matter, we do not find any substance in the contentions urged by the counsel for the insurance company. Added to this, the learned single Judge of this court in connected MFA No. 6628/2007 arose out of the same accident has negatived the said contention. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and consequently, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.”

¶88

Even otherwise, it is seen that the policy issued

¶89

covers the liability of seven persons and as such on the ground

¶90

¶91

¶92

of carrying more over persons in the vehicle in question, the insurance company cannot seek exonerating itself from its liability to indemnify the owner of the vehicle.

¶93

The claimants in all the five cases preferred their respective claim seeking compensation on account of injuries said to have been suffered by them while all the claimants were travelling under the owner as loader and unloader to load rice from Kanigal village and to unload the same at Hubli in an accident which occurred on 21.07.2007 involving the lorry bearing Reg. No.AP-21: V-1357. It is contended by all the five of them that they suffered the injuries detailed in the wound certificates marked as Exs.P5, P11, P13, P15 and P17 respectively. Considering the contents of the wound certificates coupled with the medical evidence of the Doctor, who issued such certificates, the claims filed by the claimants in KAR/NFP/CR Nos.999, 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1003 all of the year 2007 were partly allowed awarding compensation of 1,87,610/-, 1,50,258/-, 1,50,258/-, 1,26,672/and `1,75,258/-, respectively vide order dated 25.04.2008 with interest at 12% from 30 days from the date of order.

¶94

¶95

¶96

Aggrieved by the said order, the appellantinsurance company though preferred the above appeals questioning the liability as well as the quantum of compensation, as already discussed supra, the appellant restricted its ground only with regard to the quantum of compensation.

¶97

Admittedly, on perusal of the copies of the wound certificates furnished, it is seen that except the claimant in MFA No.30417/2008, all other claimants have suffered only one grievous injury, while claimant in MFA No.30417/2008 has suffered two grievous injuries. Considering the nature of injuries so suffered by the claimants and though the Doctor, who certified the disability at 35%, 35%, 35%, 30% and 40% respectively, the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation has reduced the same by 5%, as it is seen from the certificate issued, no scientific methodology is adopted by the Medical Officer in assessing the disability.

¶98

The learned counsel for the claimants fairly conceded that the amount of compensation awarded in each

¶99

¶100

¶101

case may be reduced by `35,000/- each, which submission

¶102

seems to be reasonable.

¶103

In the foregoing circumstances, all the five appeals

¶104

are allowed modifying the amount awarded in each case as hereunder:

¶105

Sl. No.	Case No. before WCC in KAR/NFP/CR	In MFA No.	The amount awarded in this appeal
01	No.999/2007	30415/2008	`1,52,610.00
02	No.1000/2007	30416/2008	`1,15,258.00
03	No.1001/2007	30417/2008	`1,15,258.00
04	No.1002/2007	30418/2008	`91,672.00
05	No.1003/2007	30419/2008	`1,40,258.00

¶106

The order with regard to other statutory benefits etc. stands duly confirmed. The amount deposited in each case is ordered to be transmitted to the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Raichur, for disbursement.

¶107

In view of allowing of the main appeals, the interim applications filed for stay in MFA Nos.30415/2008,

¶108

¶109

¶110

30417/2008, 30418/2008 and 30419/2008 does not survive

for consideration.

Sd/JUDGE

United India Insurance Co. Ltd, v. Narayana, Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

United India Insurance Co. Ltd, v. Narayana, Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Pandu S/O Mariyappa

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Pandu S/O Mariyappa

M/S a P Reddy Construction Co. Vs Balaswamy S/O Naganna

United India Insu Vs Gowramma, Ors.

United India, Vs Nagendra,Anr

United India Vs Mareppa