High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 08 KAR CK 0042

United India Insurance Company Limited vs Sri. Palani Bin Thirappa

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 18 August 2011 · Citation: (2012) 4 TAC 327

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J
CASE NUMBER
Miscellanous First Appeal No. 7106 of 2009 (WC)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 681 words

The Hon''ble Mr. Justice A.N. Venugopala Gowda

1.

2nd Respondent employed the 1st Respondent to work as a coolie in the estate. The 2nd Respondent/employer had obtained insurance coverage from the Appellant for 10 workmen. On 18.10.2005, the 1st Respondent sustained injury by accident arising out of and during the course of his employment. A claim petition was filed against the 2nd Respondent and the Appellant, to pay compensation on account of the permanent disablement suffered and the resultant loss of earning capacity. The claim petition was allowed in part by the Commissioner for Workmen''s Compensation (''CWC'' for short) at Chickmagalur, determining the compensation payable to the workman at Rs. 1,06,412/-, out of which, the liability of the employer was determined at Rs. 57,167/- and that of the Appellant at Rs. 49,245/-. The amount was ordered to be deposited within 30 days from the date of order and in case of default, to pay interest at 12% for the delayed period. This appeal by the insurance company is against the order-to deposit compensation of Rs. 49,245/-.

2.

Sri. A.M. Venkatesh, Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, contended that, the CWC has erred in holding that the Appellant is liable to deposit the compensation of Rs. 49,245/- Learned Counsel submitted that, the loss of earning capacity having been arrived at 30%, the compensation payable would work out to Rs. 29,559/- and hence, modification of the impugned order.

3.

Learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd Respondent submitted that, no interference with the impugned order is called for.

4.

Ex. R-1 is the insurance policy. The employer had obtained insurance policy covering the risk of 10 employees by showing their wages at Rs. 1,00,000/- per annum. Hence, the wage per workman being Rs. 10,000/- p.a. as far as the Appellant is concerned the wage works out to Rs. 833/- p.m. The case being one of injury, the compensation payable has been determined at Rs. 49,245/- (Rs. 833 x 197.06 x 30/100).

5.

I have perused the record. The question for consideration is:

Whether the CWC is justified in directing the Appellant to deposit compensation amount of Rs. 49,245/-, out of the determined compensation amount of Rs. 1,06,412/- ?

6.

The employment of the 1st Respondent by the 2nd Respondent as a coolie, injury sustained by accident arising out of and during the course of employment by the 1st Respondent i.e., on 18.10.2005, permanent disability suffered and the resultant loss of earning capacity and the insurance coverage of the Appellant as found by the CWC in the impugned order, is not under challenge by the Respondents. Ex. Rule 1/insurance policy was issued covering the risk of 10 employees showing the total wages of 10 employees at Rs. 1,00,000/- p.a. Thus, per workman, the wages works out to Rs. 833/- p.m. The case being one of injury, 60% of the wages has to be taken into consideration and the relevant factor applied to percentage of disability and the loss of earning capacity has to be determined. Thus, the compensation payable by the Appellant to the 1st Respondent would be Rs. 29,547.18 (Rs. 499.80 x 197.06 x 30/100).

7.

The CWC has erred in fastening the liability on the Appellant over and above Rs. 29,547/- The 2nd Respondent/employer having not questioned the order and award determining the total compensation payable at Rs. 1,06,412/- in view of the limited insurance which it had obtained from the Appellant, the balance amount has to be deposited by the 2nd Respondent/employer.

In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned order is modified.

The compensation amount payable by the Appellant stands determined at Rs. 29,547/- with interest at 12% p.a. from 04.12.2008 till the date of deposit.

Out of the amount in deposit, the compensation as above be paid to the 1st Respondent and the balance amount released in favour of the Appellant.

Needless to observe that, the 1st Respondent is entitled to realise Rs. 76,865/- (Rs. 1,06,412 - Rs. 29,547/- ) along with interest from the 2nd Respondent.

Parties to bear their respective costs.

Draw modified award.