Partly allowed

Smt Deviramma v. Mehaboob Sab H Jamadar

Karnataka HC18 Jun 2014MFA/1035/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a First Appeal under the Workmen's Compensation Act, the High Court modified the Commissioner's award. The Court allowed part of the appeal, enhancing compensation by adjusting the deceased's income to Rs.4,000/- and granting additional interest.

What did the court decide?

Award of additional Rs.25,000/- along with 12% interest from one month after the accident date until deposit.

Smt Deviramma Vs Mehaboob Sab H Jamadar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

Dated this the 18^th day of June, 2014

¶4

Before

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH

¶6

Miscellaneous First Appeal 1035 / 2012 (WC)

¶7

Between

¶8

1 Smt Deviramma, 51 yrs W/o Hanumanthappa

¶9

2 Hanumanthappa Harigolu 55 yrs, S/o Maribasappa Both are r/o Heregonigere Honnali Taluk, Davangere Appellants

¶10

(By Sri A Hanumanthappa, Adv.)

¶11

And

¶12

1 Mehaboob Sab H Jamadar Owner of Lorry Vanitha Seva Samaja, Dharwad

¶13

2 Manager National Insurance Co Ltd Dharwad Respondents

¶14

(By Sri L Sreekanta Rao, Adv. For R2)

¶15

First Appeal is filed under S.30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act praying to modify the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's

¶16

Compensation, Davangere in No.166/2008 on 28.10.2011.

¶17

First Appeal coming on for Admission this day, the Court delivered the following:

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

This is a claimants' appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Davangere in No.166/2008 on 28.10.2011.

¶20

This is a case of death. Claimants are the legal representatives of the deceased Hanumanthappa. Deceased was a cleaner in the lorry bearing No. KA 25 B 7707 who died in the accident on 21.2.2008 around 12.00 clock near Halasabalu Village on bye-pass of Harihar-Dharwad road. On the claim petition filed, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Davangere taking the income at Rs.3,000/-, assessing the disability at 60%, applying the appropriate factor, awarded compensation of Rs.3,93,246/Not satisfied with the compensation awarded, this appeal.

¶21

Heard the counsel representing the parties.

¶22

¶23

According to the counsel representing the claimants, income ought

¶24

to have been taken at Rs.4,000/- in stead of Rs.3,000/- as the accident is of

¶25

the year 2008. However, according to the counsel representing the insurer, in stead of taking the disability at 50%, it is taken at 60%.

¶26

Having heard, taking the income at Rs.4,000/-, claimants would be awarded another Rs.25,000/- over and above what has been awarded, with

¶27

12% interest from one month after the date of accident till deposit.

¶28

Appeal is allowed in part.

¶29

SD/Judge

¶30

Smt Deviramma v. Mehaboob Sab H Jamadar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Deviramma v. Mehaboob Sab H Jamadar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S N Hemanna Alias Hemanth Vs Srinivas

A 2 Z Maintenance and Engineering Service Limited Vs Bangalore Electric Supply Company Limited

Pradeep Vs Syed Latheef

Jayalakshmamma Vs the Karnataka State Board of Wakfs

Sri Yashwanth S/O Nagoji Vs Mehaboob Sab H Jamadar

A.M Mallikarjunaiah S/O Ayyanna Vs the Chief Engineer (Construction)