Appeal against Employees Compensation Tribunal award allowing Rs.1,94,618/. Court allowed appeal in part, modifying compensation to Rs.1,20,130/- based on statutory wages limit and correct application of disability factor.
Impugned award modified by awarding Rs.1,20,130/- instead of Rs.1,94,618/- with interest at 12% p.a.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2023:KHC:27532 MFA No. 2147 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2147 OF 2019 (ECA)
BETWEEN:
M/S. ORIENTAL INS. CO. LTD., SHREE MARUTHI COMPLEX, MADHUGIRI ROAD, DOBESPET, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT, REP. BY BRANCH MANAGER.
DULY REPRESENTED BY, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX, 44/45, RESIDENCY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025. REP. BY ITS MANAGER.
Digitally signed by T S NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka
(BY SRI A RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE[PH])
…APPELLANT
AND:
NC: 2023:KHC:27532 MFA No. 2147 of 2019
S/O. LATE CHANDRAPPA PATTANSHETTY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT: NEAR AYYAPPA TEMPLE, 7TH CROSS, C.M.EXTENSION, KHYATHASANDRA, TUMAKURU-572 104.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI JAIKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 [PH]; R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF ECA ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.01.2019 PASSED IN ECA NO.3/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AND ADDL.MACT, SIRA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,94,618/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF FILING PETITION TILL ENTIRE AMOUNT IS DEPOSITED.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal by the Insurance Company is directed against and the judgment and award dated 11-1-2019 in ECA No.3/2017 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC and Additional MACT, Sira, whereby a sum of Rs.1,94,618/has been awarded as compensation together with interest and directed the insurance Company to deposit the same.
working as driver under respondent No.1 in his Canter bearing Reg.No.KA.06.C.4239 since one and half years which was insured with respondent No.2. On 8-12-2016, the petitioner went to Shivamogga from Tumkur to shift the parcel belonging to TCI company and he left Shivamogga on 10-12-2016 with a load and while coming to Tumakuru via Harihara on Sira-Tumakuru NH 48, a lorry bearing Reg.No.KA.34.B.2209 which was proceeding ahead of the Canter had suddenly reduced the speed due
to which, and defects in the brakes in the Canter vehicle dashed against the backside of the said lorry. Due to which, canter vehicle was fully damaged and petitioner sustained bodily injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Sira and then to Government Hospital Tumakuru, where he took treatment as in patient and spent Rs.75,000/- towards treatment. It was further
contended that he was aged 35 years and working as driver under 1st respondent and was paid Rs.15,000/- as salary and Rs.100/- as bata. The accident took place
during and in the course of employment as driver under respondent No.1 and the vehicle was insured with respondent No.2 and policy was in force. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 being the owner and insurer of the vehicle, they are liable to pay the compensation.
through his counsel and notice to respondent No.2 served.
multiplication with relevant factor which is contrary to the provisions of Section 4 of the Act has to be taken?
NC: 2023:KHC:27532 MFA No. 2147 of 2019
compensation has to be made as stated in Section 4 of the
Act. The provisions of Section 4 (1)(a) and (b) of E.C. Act
read as below:
"Amount of Compensation: (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the amount of compensation shall be as follows, namely:--
(a) where death results from the injury, an amount equal to Fifty percent of the monthly wages of the deceased employee multiplied by the relevant factor; or an amount of one lakh and twenty thousand rupees, whichever is more;
(b) Where permanent total disablement results from the injury, an amount equal to sixty per cent of the monthly wages of the injured employee multiplied by the relevant factor; or an amount of one lakh and forty thousand rupees, whichever is more;
[Provided that the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, from time to time, enhance the amount of compensation mentioned in clauses (a) and (b)]
Explanation I.-- For the purposes of clause (a) and clause (b)," relevant factor", in relation to an employee means the factor specified in the second column of Schedule IV against the entry in the first column of that Schedule specifying the number of years which are the same as the completed years of the age of the employee on his last birthday immediately preceding the date on which the compensation fell due."
Government issued in the year 2010 fixes the monthly income of an employee at Rs.8,000/- and the Tribunal
could not have considered the income at Rs.9,000/- per month. It is evident that the provisions of Section 4 of the E.C. Act laid down that there is no option for the Tribunal to consider the wages other than the one specified under Section 4 of the E.C. Act.
accepted the disability of 9%. Therefore, no fault can be found in respect of the quantum of the disability assessed by the Tribunal.
as mentioned in Section 4 of the E.C. Act. The Tribunal has erred in not deducting 60% of the wages as required under Section 4(1)(b) of the Act. Sofar as the age of the petitioner is concerned, there is no dispute between the parties. Hence, the compensation is calculated as: Rs.8,000/- x 60% x 9% (disability) x 197.06 = Rs.85,129.92 paise by taking the relevant factor for the age of 35 years to be 197.06.
Rs.35,000/- towards medical expenses as awarded by the Tribunal, totally a sum of Rs.1,20,129.92 which is rounded off to Rs.1,20,130/-. The substantial questions of law framed by this Court are answered accordingly. Hence, the appeal filed by the Insurance Company deserves to be allowed in part. Hence, the following:
NC: 2023:KHC:27532 MFA No. 2147 of 2019
ORDER
The appeal is allowed in part.
The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified by awarding the compensation of Rs.1,20,130/- instead of Rs.1,94,618/- awarded by the Tribunal along with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of expiry of 30 days from the date of the accident till the date of deposit before the Tribunal.
The amount which is in deposit before the Tribunal
shall be disbursed accordingly and if in excess, the same be returned to the appellant Insurance Company.
Sd/JUDGE
tsn*
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court was justified in considering the monthly income of the claimant at Rs.9,000/- contrary to Section 4(1) of the Act.
Whether the trial court was justified in considering the entire income of the claimant for multiplication with relevant factor contrary to Section 4 of the Act.
What is the correct quantum of compensation for permanent total disablement including disability percentage under Section 4(1)(b).
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Orient Insurance Co. Ltd.
Sri Omkameshvara
Mr. C.P Veeresh
C M Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
