Rajagopalacharya Vs C K Srinivasa

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.10.2018 PASSED IN ECA.NO. 42/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶27

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶29

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶30

The claimant/employee, being dissatisfied with the compensation of Rs.1,27,900/- awarded in E.C.A.No.42/2016 by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CEFC, Chitradurga (for brevity, "the Commissioner"), is in appeal.

¶31

The fact that the accident occurred during the course of employment and the further fact that the employer and employee relationship are not in dispute.

¶32

The Commissioner, on assessment of evidence, has awarded the following sums as compensation:

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:36620 MFA No. 168 of 2020

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

CNR: KAHC010564192019

¶36

Sl. No.	Particulars	Amount in (Rs.)
1.	Loss of income	1,22,726.40
2.	Medical expenses	5,166
	Total	1,27,892.40
	Rounded off to	1,27,900

¶37

Learned counsel for the claimant would contend that the Commissioner has erred in assessing the disability at 16%, although the evidence of PW.2 - Doctor discloses that the claimant had sustained 27% disability to the particular limb and 60 to 70% functional disability. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal.

¶38

Per contra , learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that the Commissioner has rightly assessed the disability and has rightly awarded the compensation. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

¶39

As could be gathered from records, the employer and employee is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the vehicle involved in the accident is covered with the insurance policy of insurer. The claimant is a driver and that the

¶40

4 -

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:36620 MFA No. 168 of 2020

¶43

CNR: KAHC010564192019

¶44

testimony of PW.2- Doctor reveals that the claimant sustained 27% permanent disability to the partial right upper limb. Having regard to the permanent disability suffered by the claimant at 27% to the right upper limb, it is obvious that the same would affect his avocation as driver and therefore, I deem it just and appropriate to assess the disability at 25%.

¶45

As per the Workmen's Compensation Act, the maximum wages of the employee has to be taken at Rs.8,000/- and in view of the injury and disability sustained, 60% of the income of the claimant has to be taken into consideration by applying the relevant factor of 159.80. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled for compensation of towards 'loss of income' is Rs.1,91,760/- (Rs.4,800/- X 25% X 159.80) as against the sum of Rs.1,22,726.40/-.

¶46

The sum awarded as medical expenses at Rs.5,166/- being based on the documentary evidence, do not call for modification and hence confirmed.

¶47

5 -

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

NC: 2026:KHC:36620 MFA No. 168 of 2020

¶50

CNR: KAHC010564192019

¶51

Consequently, the award of the Commissioner is modified

¶52

and the claimant - employee would be entitled to the following compensation:

¶53

Sl. No.	Compensation under different Heads	As awarded by the Commissioner (Rs.)	As awarded by this Court (Rs.)
1.	Loss of income	1,22,726.40	1,91,760
2.	Medical expenses	5,166	5,166
	Total	1,27,892.40	1,96,926
	Rounded off to	1,27,900

¶54

Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total compensation of Rs.1,96,926/- as against Rs.1,27,900/-, along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from one month after the date of the accident till the date of deposit.

¶55

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶56