AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 722 wordsB. Manohar, J.—Appellant is the claimant, being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in the judgment and order dated 14.8.2081 made in WCA/NF/148/2007 passed by the Labour Officer for Commissioner for Workmen''s Compensation, Haveri (hereinafter referred to as ''the WCC'') has filed this appeal.
In the claim petition, the claimant has contended that he was working as a cleaner in a lorry bearing Registration No. KA-27/A-4545 belonging to the first respondent herein. As per the instructions of owner of the vehicle, on 30th January, 2007, after unloading crushed stones at Huvina Hadagali, while returning, due to the rash and negligence driving of the lorry, the driver lost control over the vehicle and the vehicle met with an accident. The claimant who was working as a cleaner in the said lorry sustained grievous injuries. Initially he had taken treatment in the Government Hospital at Ranebennur and thereafter he had taken treatment in Private Hospital at Davanagere. The claimant claims that owner of the vehicle was paying him salary of Rs. 200/- per day and batta of Rs. 50/- per day. The accident occurred during the course and out of employment. Hence, sought for compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-.
The owner of vehicle though served with notice, remained unrepresented. The second respondent - Insurance Company entered appearance and filed written statement disputing the accident and denied their liability. The WCC, after considering the oral and documentary evidence let in by the parties, found that in the accident the claimant has sustained fracture of 5th and 6th ribs, the fracture of left pubic rami and injury to the pelvis. The doctor has assessed the disability to an extent of 45% towards fracture of pubic rami and 15% towards fracture of two ribs and assessed the disability to an extent of 60%. However, the doctor has not assessed the functional disability of the claimant. The WCC taking into consideration functional disability at 38% and taking the income of the claimant at Rs. 3,200/- p.m., applying the relevant factor 211.79, as he was aged about 28 years, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,54,522/- with interest at the rale of 12% p.a. from the date of the order. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimant has filed this appeal.
I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and order, oral and documentary evidence.
The occurrence of accident, injuries sustained by the claimant are not in dispute. The dispute is only with regard to quantum of compensation. Though the claimant claims that he was getting salary of Rs. 200/- per day and batta of Rs. 50/- per day, no document has been produced to substantiate the same. The owner of vehicle has also not supported the case of the claimant. The accident occurred in the year 2007. The minimum wages being paid to the coolies working the transport department during the relevant period was only Rs. 3,200/- p.m. Hence, the WCC has taken the income of the claimant as Rs. 3,200/- p.m. The doctor who has issued disability certificate has not assessed the functional disability. In view of that, the WCC had taken functional disability as 38% and awarded compensation of Rs. 1,54,522/-. The claimant has taken conservative treatment. He has not undergone any surgery. Hence the assessment of functional disability by the WCC is in accordance with law. I find no infirmity with regard to the quantum of compensation awarded by the WCC.
With regard to interest is concerned, the WCC has awarded interest from 30 days from the date of judgment and order, which is contrary to the law laid by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Siby George and others reported in 2012 ACJ 2126. As per the said judgment, the interest has to be awarded from one month after the accident. To that extent, the claimant has to succeed. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
The appeal is allowed in part. The judgment order dated 14.8.2008 made in No.WCA/NF/148/2007 is modified only to the extent that the claimant is entitled for interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from one month after the accident. In all other respects, the judgment and order passed by the WCC is confirmed.
