The Divisional Manager Vs M Hanumanthappa S/O Murali

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

¶6

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 23466 OF 2013 (WC-) C/W

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 23467 OF 2013 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 24700 OF 2013 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 24701 OF 2013

¶8

IN MFA NO.23466 OF 2013 BETWEEN:

¶9

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BALLARI, REPRESENTED BY THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, SUMANGALA COMPLEX, 2^ND FLOOR, LAMINGTON ROAD, HUBLI -580020

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. S K KAYAKAMATH, ADV)

¶12

AND:

¶13

MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR

¶14

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.08.22 13:01:14 +0530

¶15

SRI. GOURANNA S/O YALLAPPA AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: EX-DRIVER, R/O. RAMPUR VILLAGE, TQ. MOLAKALMURU, NOW AT RUPANAGUDI ROAD, MILLERPETH, BALLARI.

¶16

SRI. B. JAYARAM REDDY S/O. B.S.M. GANGANNA, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING NO.KA-16/C-5323, R/O. KONDAPUR VILLAGE, J.B. HALLI, POST, TQ: MOLAKALMURU, DIST. CHITRADURGA.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. Y LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADV FOR R1, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 AND 1 OTHER

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.30(1) OF WC ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE ORDER DTD:21.05.2013 PASSED IN WC/NF 2/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMENS COMPENSATION, SUB-DIVISION-I, BALLARI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.1,44,577/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION AND SHALL BE DEPOSITED WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER.

¶23

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,

¶24

IN MFA NO.23467 OF 2013 BETWEEN:

¶25

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BALLARI, REP BY THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, SUMANGALA COMPLEX, 2^ND FLOOR, LAMINGTON ROAD, HUBLI-580020.

¶26

…APPELLANT

¶27

(BY SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADV)

¶28

AND:

¶29

SRI. M. HANUMANTHAPPA S/O MURALI AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: EX-CLEANER, R/O. A.K.COLONY RAMPUR VILLAGE, TQ: MOLAKALMURU, NOW AT TALUR ROAD, BALLARI.

¶30

SRI. B. JAYARAM REDDY S/O. B.S.M. GANGANNA AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING NO.KA-16/C-5323, R/O. KONDAPUR VILLAGE, J.B.HALLI POST, TQ: MOLAKALMURU, DIST: CHITRADURGA.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADV FOR R1, NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)

¶33

THIS MFA FILED U/SEC.30(1) OF WC ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE ORDER DTD:21.05.2013 PASSED IN WC/NF 3/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMENS COMPENSATION, SUB-DIVISION-I, BALLARI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.46,487/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶35

3 -

¶36

12% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION AND SHALL BE DEPOSITED WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER.

¶37

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,

¶38

IN MFA NO.24700 OF 2013 BETWEEN:

¶39

SRI. GOURANNA S/O YALLAPPA AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: EX-DRIVER, R/O. RAMPURA, TQ. MOLAKALMOORU NOW R/AT: ROOPANGUDI ROAD, MILLER PET, BALLARI.

¶40

…APPELLANT

¶41

(BY SRI. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADV)

¶42

AND:

¶43

SRI. B. JAYARAM REDDY S/O B.S.M. GANGANNA OCC: LORRY OWNER BEARING REG. NO.KA-16/C-5323 R/O. KONDAPUR VILLAGE, J.B.HALLI POLST, MOLAKALMOORU TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

¶44

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BALLARI.

¶45

…RESPONDENTS

¶46

(BY SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADV FOR R2 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶47

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.30(1) OF WC ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.05.2013 PASSED IN W.C. NO.2/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMENS COMPENSATION, SUB DIVISION-I, BALLARI PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶48

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,

¶49

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 AND 1 OTHER

¶50

4 -

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

IN MFA NO.24701 OF 2013 BETWEEN:

¶53

SRI. M. HANUMANTHAPPA S/O MURALI, AGED: 25 YEARS, OCC: EX-CLEANER, R/O. M.K.COLONY, RAMPUR, MOLAKALMURU TALUK, PRESENTLY AT TALUR ROAD, BALLARI.

¶54

…APPELLANT

¶55

(BY SRI. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADV)

¶56

AND:

¶57

SRI. B. JAYARAM REDDY S/O B.S.M.GANGANNA, OCC: LORRY OWNER BEARING REG. NO.KA-16/C-5323, R/O. KONDAPUR VILLAGE, J.B. HALLI POST,

¶58

TQ. MOLAKALMOORU, DIST. CHITRADURGA.

¶59

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BALLARI.

¶60

…RESPONDENT

¶61

(BY SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADV FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶62

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.30(1) OF WC ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.05.2013 PASSED IN W.C. NO.3/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMENS COMPENSATION, SUB DIVISION-I, BALLARI PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶63

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶64

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

¶65

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 AND 1 OTHER

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶68

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)

¶69

These appeals arise out of the common award dated 21.05.2013, passed by the Labour Officer and the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Sub-DivisionI, Ballari, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Commissioner’, for short) in W.C.N.F.Nos.2/2009 and 3/2009.

¶70

Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of these appeals, are as follows:

¶71

That the petitioners were working as driver and cleaner under the respondent No.1-employer in a lorry bearing No.KA-16/C-5323. On 07.11.2008, the petitioners loaded the materials at Bengaluru at the instance of respondent No.1-employer, and on the next day 08.11.2008, they were proceeding to Ballari to unload the material. When they reached near Hanagal, the Driver of

¶72

the lorry lost the control over the lorry and the lorry toppled down. As a result, both the petitioners sustained

¶73

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶74

a grievous injuries. As such, they filed the petitions seeking a compensation. It is contended that the accident occurred during the course of employment, and sought a compensation from the insurance company.

¶75

Respondent No.1-employer filed a statement of objections and admitted that the petitioners were working under him, and that the accident occurred during the course of employment.

¶76

Respondent No.2-insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the petition’s averments and prays for dismissal of the claim petition.

¶77

To prove their case, the petitioners examined themselves as PW-1 and PW-2, and marked 11 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-11. The Insurance company has not examined any of its officials; however marked the insurance policy as Ex.R-1.

¶78

The Commissioner, based on the evidence led

¶79

by the petitioners, allowed the petitions in part vide award

¶80

7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶81

dated 21.05.2013 and awarded a sum of Rs.1,44,577/- to

¶82

the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.2/2009 and a sum of Rs.46,487/- to the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.3/2009 with interest at 12% p.a. after one month from the date of accident till its realization. The Insurance Company was directed to pay the compensation to the petitioners. The petitioners aggrieved by the common award filed the appeals in MFA No.24700/2013 and MFA No.24701/2013 and the Insurance Company, being aggrieved by the some common award filed the appeals in MFA No.23466/2013 and MFAA No.23467/2013.

¶83

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

¶84

and the learned counsel for the insurance company.

¶85

Learned counsel for insurance company submits

¶86

that the Commissioner has committed an error in assessing the loss of earning capacity of the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.2/2009 at 30%, by ignoring item No.14 at

¶87

part II of Schedule I of the Workmen’s Compensation Act,

¶88

8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶89

1923 which discloses that for loss of all toes of both feet proximal to proximal inter-phalangeal joint, is to be assessed at 30%. Hence, he submits that the disability assessed by the Commissioner to the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.2/2009 is on the higher side, as the said petitioner has suffered only a fracture, and not an amputation. He submits that the Commissioner has also committed an error in assessing the loss of earning capacity of the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.3/2009 at 10%. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeals filed by the insurance company, and to dismiss the appeals filed by the petitioners.

¶90

Per contra, learned counsel for petitioners submits that the Commissioner has committed an error in not considering the income of the petitioners at Rs.5,000/p.m. and Rs.4,000/- p.m, respectively. Hence, on this ground, prays to allow the appeals filed by the petitioners, and to dismiss the appeals, filed by the insurance company.

¶91

9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 AND 1 OTHER

¶92

HC-KAR

¶93

Perused the records, and considered the

¶94

submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶95

This Court, vide order dated 03.02.2022, admitted the appeals in M.F.A.No.23466/2013, and 23467/2013 to consider the following substantial questions of law:

¶96

IN M.F.A.No.23466/2013

¶97

i. Whether the Labour Officer and Commissioner for workmen compensation is justified in assessing the loss of earning capacity @ 30% by ignoring the item No.14, Part-II of Schedule-I of Workmen’s Compensation Act, which discloses that the loss of earning capacity for amputation of all the toes of both feet proximal inter phalnge joint is 30%?

¶98

ii. Whether the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation is justified in assessing the loss of earning capacity @ 30% without considering the ratio laid down by the Full Bench of Karnataka High Court in the case of S.S. PATIL Vs. A. B. Bavihal and others reported in ILR Karnataka Page 193 ?

¶99

10 -

¶100

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 AND 1 OTHER

¶101

HC-KAR

¶102

IN M.F.A.No.23467/2013

¶103

i. Whether the Labour Officer and Commissioner for workmen compensation is justified in assessing the loss of earning capacity @ 10% by ignoring the Section 4(1)(c) of the W.C. Act?

¶104

ii. Whether the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation is justified in assessing the loss of earning capacity @ 10% without considering the ratio laid down by the Full Bench of Karnataka High Court in the case of S.S. PATIL Vs. A. B. Bavihal and others reported in ILR Karnataka Page 193 ?

¶105

There is no dispute that the petitioners

¶106

sustained injuries, and the accident occurred during the course of employment.

¶107

As per the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923

¶108

the income of the petitioners is to be considered at Rs.4,000/- p.m. for the accident of 2008, whereas the Commissioner has considered the income of the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.2/2009 at Rs.4,500/- p.m., which is on the higher side and has considered the income of the

¶109

11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶110

petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.3/2009 at Rs.3,500/- p.m. which

¶111

is on the lower side. Accordingly, the income of the petitioners in both the petitions is re-considered at Rs.4,000/- p.m.

¶112

Ex.P-7 is the disability certificate about the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.2/2009 and Ex.P-11 is the disability certificate about the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.3/2009. Both certificates are issued by Dr. Lakshmi Narayana. K., Ballari, who has opined that the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.2/2009 has suffered disability to the extent of 30% and the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.3/2009 has suffered disability to the extent of 15%.

¶113

The Commissioner has ignored item No.14, part II of Schedule I of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923. Hence, the loss of earning capacity assessed by the Commissioner in W.C.N.F.No.2/2009 at 30% is on the higher side. From the perusal of the records produced by

¶114

12 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶115

the petitioners, and considering the evidence of the doctor, this Court re-assesses the loss of earning capacity of the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.2/2009 at 15%, as he has

¶116

suffered only injuries, and a fracture and not amputation of the toes. Accordingly, the loss of earning capacity is recalculated as under:

¶117

Rs.4,000 x 60% = 2,400/-

¶118

Rs.2,400 x 178.49 x 15% = 64,256/-

¶119

The Commissioner has assessed the disability of the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.3/2009 at 10% which is just and proper, and do not call for any interference. Accordingly, the loss of earning capacity is re-calculated as under:

¶120

Rs.4,000 x 60% = 2,400/-

¶121

Rs.2,400 x 221.37 x 10% = 53,128/-

¶122

In view of the above discussion, substantial

¶123

questions of law framed in MFA No.23466/2013 are answered in negative and substantial question of law

¶124

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶125

13 -

¶126

framed in MFA No.23467/2013 are answered in

¶127

affirmative.

¶128

18. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following

¶129

order:

¶130

ORDER

¶131

(i) M.F.A.No.23466/2013 and M.F.A.No.24701/2013 are allowed in part.

¶132

(ii) M.F.A.No.23467/2013 and M.F.A.No.24700/2013 are hereby dismissed.

¶133

(iii) The judgment and award dated 21.05.2013 passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Sub-Division-I, Ballari, in W.C.N.F.Nos.2/2009 and 3/2009 are hereby modified.

¶134

(iv) The compensation awarded by the Commissioner to the petitioner in W.C.N.F.No.2/2009 is reduced from Rs.1,44,577/- to Rs.64,256/-.

¶135

(v) The compensation awarded by the Commissioner to the petitioner in

¶136

14 -

¶137

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10105 MFA No. 23466 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23467 of 2013 MFA No. 24700 of 2013 AND 1 OTHER

¶138

HC-KAR

¶139

W.C.N.F.No.3/2009 is enhanced from Rs.46,487/- to Rs.53,128/-.

¶140

(vi) The insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶141

(vii) The amount in deposit be transmitted to the Commissioner.

¶142

(viii) The office is directed to refund the excess amount, if any, to the insurance company.

¶143

Sd/(ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE

¶144

NAA CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

The Divisional Manager v. M Hanumanthappa S/O Murali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Divisional Manager v. M Hanumanthappa S/O Murali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Geeta Vs Jagadish Basalingappa

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt Vishaklakshi W/O Chandrashekar Yaradal

Maruti S Kakatikar Vs Smt.Prabhavati W/O Chandrakant Naik

Sri. Raghavendra S/O Honnappa Kannanayakar, Vs Smt. Honnamma W/O Hanamanthappa Kooler

The Divisional Manager, Vs Sri. Gouranna S/O Yallappa

Gouranna S/O Yallappa Vs B Jayaram Reddy S/O B.S.M.Ganganna