Chandrashekara Vs the Manager

CHANDRASHEKARA S/O THUKRA SAFALYA @ TURKA SAPALYA NOW AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT KODENCHIL HOUSE, MAJIBAIL POST, VIA MANJESHWAR MAJIBAIL, KASARGOD KERALA - 671 323.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. RAGHU R, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE MANAGER

¶15

UNIED INDIA INS. CO. LTD., KRUSHIVBHAVAN, NEXT TO MAGISTRATE COURT, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 025 POLICY ISSUED AT UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD., TIGER HILLS POST BOX NO. 19, MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, KASARGOD, KERALA - 671 121.

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:22162 MFA No. 2290 of 2024

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

USMAN

¶19

S/O ABBU BYARI NO. 5-225, MUTHAR MANGALURU, KANARA - SOUTH MANGALURU - 575 221.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. SRINIVASA K.N, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 22.04.2026, NOTICE OF R2 DISPENSED WITH)

¶22

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.08.2022 PASSED IN ECA NO.01/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MAGADI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

This appeal is filed by the appellant/petitioner under Section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 challenging the judgment and award dated 02.08.2022 passed in ECA No.01/2020 on the file of the Prl. Senior

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:22162 MFA No. 2290 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

Civil Judge and Commissioner Employees Compensation and MACT, Magadi, for enhancing the compensation.

¶31

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for

¶32

the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.1. Vide order dated 22.04.2026 notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶33

Injured petitioner met with an accident on 08.01.2020 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-. The Tribunal considered the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.13,19,433/with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶34

Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed and it is mainly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner's income was taken as Rs.15,000/- per month instead of Rs.20,000/- per month

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:22162 MFA No. 2290 of 2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

and Bata of Rs.200/- per day. This appeal is filed in which

¶39

the following substantial question of law arises:

¶40

"1. Whether the commissioner was justified in considering the functional disability at 22% as against the assessment made by the qualified medical practitioner who has assessed the whole body functional disability as driver at 80%.

¶41

2. Whether the Commissioner was justified in considering the wages of the appellant at Rs.15,000/- p.m. instead of Rs.20,000/- p.m. "

¶42

The accident occurred in the year 2020. As per

¶43

the notification dated 03.01.2020, his income is to be taken as Rs.15,000/- per month. As it is a case of injury, 60% of the income is to be considered for the purpose of calculation i.e., 60% of 15,000/- is Rs.9,000/-. It is stated that the petitioner was a driver and while driving the vehicle, he met with an accident and sustained grievous injuries. Petitioner filed Ex.P.6-Wound certificate and Exs.P.8 and 9-Discharge summaries and examined the

¶44

5 -

¶45

NC: 2026:KHC:22162 MFA No. 2290 of 2024

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

doctor as P.W.2, he is an orthopedic surgeon. He stated

¶48

that the petitioner sustained the following injuries:

¶49

Mild head injury

¶50

Pleural effusion with lung contusion

¶51

Communited fracture of right scapular body and acromion process.

¶52

Multiple rib fracture (Right 2^nd to 6^th & left 4^th to 9^th ribs)

¶53

Fracture right transverse process of C7 & D1 vertebral body.

¶54

Doctor has assessed the total disability of the

¶55

arm at 60%, whole body physical disability at 22% and whole body functional disability at 80%. He was aged 40 years and the relevant factor is 184.17. Therefore, the compensation comes Rs.13,26,024/- (Rs.9000/x 184.17 x 80%). Apart from that, Tribunal has granted Rs.9,93,673/- towards medical expenses and the said amount is confirmed.

¶56

Rs.13,26,024 + Rs.9,93,673/- = Rs.23,19,697/-

¶57

Thus in all, components awarded by this court

¶58

are as below,

¶59

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:22162 MFA No. 2290 of 2024

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of income	13,26,024.00
Medical expenses	9,93,673.00
Total	23,19,697.00

¶62

Hence, the appellant-petitioner is entitled for a

¶63

total enhanced compensation of Rs.23,19,697/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a.

¶64

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶65

ORDER

¶66

i. Appeal is allowed in part.

¶67

ii. The judgment and award dated 02.08.2022 passed in ECA No.01/2020, by Prl. Senior Civil Judge and Commissioner Employees Compensation and MACT, Magadi, is modified;

¶68

iii. The appellant-petitioner is entitled to a sum

¶69

of Rs.23,19,697/- along with interest at

¶70

NC: 2026:KHC:22162 MFA No. 2290 of 2024

¶71

7 -

¶72

HC-KAR

¶73

12% p.a., from the date of petition till the

¶74

date of realization, instead of Rs.13,19,433/- granted by the Tribunal.

¶75

iv. Respondent No.1/Insurance Company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.1/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.10,00,264/- along with the interest at the rate of 12% within one month from the date of accident.

¶76

v. On such deposit, appellant-petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same.

¶77

vi. On 24.04.2026, the delay of 544 days is condoned by this Court on the condition that the claimant will not be entitled for the interest in case of enhancement. Hence,

¶78

NC: 2026:KHC:22162 MFA No. 2290 of 2024

¶79