Partly allowed

The Divisional Manager,National Insurance Co.Ltd v. Smt Rekha Dadaso Suryavaunshi

Karnataka HC6 Jul 2022MFA/22090/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka (Dharwad Bench) disposed of two miscellaneous first appeals filed under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, concerning an accident death of a coolie. The court rejected the insurer's challenge to the employer-employee relationship and insurance coverage but allowed the claimants' appeal partially by directing interest at 12% p.a. from 30 days of the accident.

What did the court decide?

Interest on the awarded compensation is granted at the rate of 12% per annum with effect from 30 days from the date of the accident.

The Divisional Manager,National Insurance Co.Ltd Vs… — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF JULY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.KRISHNA BHAT MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 22417 OF 2010 (WC-) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 22090 OF 2010

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. REKHA DADASO SURYAVANSHI AGE.26 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. GAJABHARWADI, TQ.CHIKKODI, DIST.BELGAUM.

¶8

KUMAR VIJAY DADASO SURYAVANSHI AGE.5 YEARS, R/O. GAJABHARWADI, TQ.CHIKKODI, DIST.BELGAUM.

¶9

KUMARI RANI DADASO SURYAVANSHI AGE.02 YEARS, R/O. GAJABHARWADI, TQ.CHIKKODI, DIST.BELGAUM.

¶10

SRI SHANKAR RAMA SURYAVANSHI AGE.59 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GAJABHARWADI, TQ.CHIKKODI, DIST.BELGAUM.

¶11

Digitally signed by SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD

¶12

SMT. PARWATI SHANKAR SURYAVANSHI AGE.51 YEARS, R/O. GAJABHARWADI, TQ.CHIKKODI, DIST.BELGAUM.

¶13

SINCE APPELLANTS NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS, R/BY APPELLANT NO.1

¶14

…APPELLANTS

¶15

(BY SRI. HARISH MAIGUR, ADVOCATE)

¶16

¶17

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶18

AND:

¶19

SRI ANIL AATMARAM NIKKAM AGE. MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. GAJABHARWADI, TQ. CHIKKODI, DIST. BELGAUM.

¶20

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, RAMDEVGALLI, BELGAUM.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI S. K. KAYAKMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2, R1 SERVED)

¶23

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 30(1) OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.03.2010 PASSED IN W.C.A. SR NO.5/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER & COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, SUB-DIVISION-I, BELGAUM, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶24

IN MFA NO.22090/2010

¶25

BETWEEN:

¶26

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, RAMADEVGALLI BELGAUM, THROUGH THE ASST. MANAGER, THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., SUJATA COMPLEX,HUBLI.

¶27

(BY SRI. S K KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶28

…APPELLANT

¶29

¶30

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶31

AND:

¶32

SMT REKHA DADASO SURYAVAUNSHI AGE. 26 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O:GAJABHARWADI, TQ:CHIKKODI, DIST:BELGAUM.

¶33

KUMAR VIJAY DADASO SURYAVAUNSHI, AGE. 5 YEARS, R/O:GAJABHARWADI, TQ:CHIKKODI, DIST:BELGAUM.

¶34

KUMARI RANI DADASO SURYAVAUNSHI AGE. 2 YEARS, R/O:GAJABHARWADI, TQ:CHIKKODI, DIST:BELGAUM.

¶35

SRI.SHANKAR RAMA SURYAVAUNSHI AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O:GAJABHARWADI, TQ:CHIKKODI, DIST:BELGAUM.

¶36

SMT.PARVATI W/O SHANKAR SURYAVAUNSHI AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O:GAJABHARWADI, TQ:CHIKKODI,DIST:BELGAUM.

¶37

SRI.ANIL ATMARAM NIKKAM AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O:GAJABHARWADI, TQ:CHIKKODI, DIST:BELGAUM.

¶38

…RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SRI HARISH M. MAIGUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1TO R5, R6 SERVED)

¶40

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 30(1) OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 26.03.2010 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, SUB-DIVISION-I, BELGAUM, BELGAUM DISTRICT IN W.C.S.R.05-2009 AND TO PASS ANY OTHER ORDER OR ORDER AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT

¶41

¶42

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶43

UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASES, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶44

JUDGMENT

¶45

These appeals are at the instance of the Insurance Company and the claimants calling in question the legality and validity of the award dated 26.03.2010 in W.C.S.R.No.05/2009 passed by the learned Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Sub Division-I, Belgaum (for short “the Commissioner”).

¶46

Brief facts are that one Sri Dadaso Suryavanshi was working as a coolie in tractor-trailers bearing registration No.KA-23/TA-3492, KA-23/TA-4604 & 4605 owned by respondent No.1-Sri Anil Atmaram Nikkam and insured with the appellant-Insurance Company. On 17.11.2008, while deceased was working as coolie in the said tractor-trailers which was loaded with the sugar cane, near Gajabharavadi, Chougala Mala on Konnur Road, on account of rash and negligent driving of the said tractor

¶47

¶48

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶49

trailers, the deceased fell down from the same and later on, vehicle ran over him resultantly he died.

¶50

On claim petition being filed, the same was resisted by the owner-insured by filing his statement of objections, in which he admitted the employer and employee relationship, as well as the accident taking place arising out of and in the course of employment. The appellant-Insurance Company filed separate statement of objections denying material averments in the claim petition.

¶51

During enquiry, claimant No.1 examined herself as PW.1 and Exs.P1 to P6 were marked. Respondent No.1Owner examined himself as RW.1 and Exs.R.1 to R3 were marked. Insurance company examined one of its employees as RW2 and Policy of Insurance was marked.

¶52

After hearing the learned counsel on both sides

¶53

and perusing the records, learned Commissioner has awarded compensation of Rs.3,32,768/- with the interest thereon.

¶54

¶55

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶56

Learned counsel for the Insurance Company advanced twofold contentions. Firstly, he contended that finding of the learned Commissioner that there was employer and employee relationship between the owner of the tractor-trailers and the deceased is based on no evidence and therefore, it is illegal. Secondly, he contended that the Policy of Insurance issued by the appellant-Insurance Company did not cover the risk of the deceased under Sub-Section 1 of Section 147 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘Act’) and therefore, the appellant is not liable to pay compensation.

¶57

Learned counsel for the claimants in support of

¶58

their appeal opposes the contention of learned counsel for the Insurance Company and per contra, he submitted that the compensation awarded is on the lower side. Learned Commissioner has committed an error in taking monthly income of the deceased only at Rs.3,200/- and on the other hand, it should have been taken at Rs.4,000/- per month. He also submitted that the rate of interest

¶59

¶60

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶61

awarded by the learned Commissioner on the compensation amount is erroneous and on the other hand, it was his submission that the learned Commissioner ought to have awarded interest on the compensation at 12% per annum with effect from 30 days from the date of accident and accordingly, he prayed that appeal should be allowed and compensation should be enhanced.

¶62

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and I have perused the records.

¶63

The case of the claimants is that deceased Dadaso Suryavaunshi was working as a coolie in tractortrailers bearing registration No. No.KA-23/TA-3492, KA23/TA-4604 & 4605 owned by respondent No.1. It is further case of the claimants that on 17.11.2008, while deceased was proceeding in said the tractor-trailers as per the instructions of owner-employer, he fell down from the vehicle and the it ran over him, resulting in his death in the spot itself.

¶64

¶65

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶66

The owner-insured who was respondent No.1 before the learned Commissioner in his statement of objections has admitted the fact that there was employer and employee relationship and the deceased had died in the accident arising in the course of and out of employment. During his cross examination also, it was elicited that tractor-trailer in question was loaded in the field of one Khadar Sanadi and was proceeding to another field for further loading the tractor trailers and at that time, the deceased was proceeding in the said tractortrailers as he was employee-coolie and he had fallen down from the vehicle and it ran over him resulting in his death. In that view of the matter, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the finding of the learned Commissioner that employer and employee relationship between the owner-insured and the deceased has been established and that being supported by the evidence on record is not liable to be interfered with in an appeal under Section 30 of Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923. Hence, there is no

¶67

¶68

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶69

merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company in this behalf.

¶70

Insofar as the coverage under Sub-Section 1 of Section 147 of the Act for the deceased is concerned, from the facts as borne out from the record, the deceased was working as Coolie in the tractor-trailers which is a goods vehicle. The only claim arising from the accident is insofar as death of the deceased is concerned and for the same there is compulsory coverage for three employees in LMV goods vehicle. In that view of the matter, there is no merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that there is no compulsory coverage under Sub Section 1 of Section 147 of the Act, for the deceased.

¶71

In regard to the enhancement of compensation

¶72

awarded is concerned, the learned Commissioner has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.3,200/- per month. The accident had taken place in the year 2008. Learned Commissioner having recorded a finding of fact regarding income of the deceased, I do not find any good

¶73

10 -

¶74

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶75

ground to interfere with the same and accordingly, the income of the deceased is maintained as Rs.3,200/-. Therefore, as regards the quantum of compensation awarded is concerned, no case is made out for enhancing the same.

¶76

In regard to interest awarded is concerned, law is clear as per the provisions of the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 itself. The interest that should be awarded on the compensation is at the rate of 12% per annum with effect from 30 days from the date of the accident.

¶77

Accordingly, in this case also on the compensation awarded, the claimants are entitled to grant of interest at the rate of 12% per annum with effect from 30 days from the date of the accident and the appeal of the claimant to the said extent is liable to be allowed.

¶78

11 -

¶79

MFA No. 22417 of 2010 C/W MFA No. 22090 of 2010

¶80

15. Hence the following:

¶81

ORDER

¶82

i) The appeal filed by the insurance company is dismissed as devoid of merits.

¶83

ii) The appeal filed by the claimants is allowed in part with regard to the interest in terms as above.

¶84

ii) Amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the Court of learned jurisdictional Senior Civil Judge along with the records forthwith.

¶85

iii) In view of disposal of the appeals, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed off accordingly.

¶86

Sd/JUDGE

¶87

SSP

The Divisional Manager,National Insurance Co.Ltd v. Smt Rekha Dadaso Suryavaunshi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Divisional Manager,National Insurance Co.Ltd v. Smt Rekha Dadaso Suryavaunshi

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

Chenna Mastaya Naik Vs Thakkar Bhavinbhai Jatyanti

The Divisional Manager, Vs Sri. Pavan S/O Dattatraya Jituri

Kamalawwa W/O Laxman Byakod Vs Ramappa M Byakod

Nirmala S Nagaraj W/O Late Nagaraja Vs S Basavaraja S/O Sharabaiah

T Chandrababu @ Babu Chandra Modaliyar @ T.C. Balu Vs Smt. Vishalakshi T Kontiruvenkadasam

Smt. Rekha Dadaso Suryavanshi Vs Sri. Anil. Aatmaram. Nikkam