Karnataka High Court
New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Sanna Kariyappa & Sanna Kariyanna on 2 June, 2011
Author: N.K.Patil
Bench: N.K.Patil
to
2. Srnt. Jayamma,
W/ o Sauna Kariyanna,
New aged about 40 years.
3. Govindaraju,
S/o Sauna Kariyanna,
Now agsd about 26 years, _
4. Prema,
D/0 Sarina Kariyanna,
Now aged about 18_y'sars.;V _ ,
All 1*/W Bandihalh, N';ttur'-Ijlobli, S _
Gubb1Ta1uk, Turnkur 'D_1str:c*t. __
5. N.C.Boregow6§a-,'a
S / 0 Ch1;'r1fi:h€g;ov.Ida.; or; V
R/0 Bhakt1{1_a;faha3ii., S' --
Kuni-galff , 'I"<:;_n1}u.:r I.)'isL;--. . ' ... Respondents
(By Srf;--._Pafiei' for R1 to R4.
R5 1'1otir:e dsisp-eI11s_€d__ Wiih V/o dated. 1.6.201 1) 5 This fi1.'€dS;1.1nder Section 30(1) of WC. Act, agaii«:st.__L' "she judgment dated 31.5.2007 passed in _ ZAVVCEX/CR4a31[2OO7 on the file of the Labour Officer and C§o'rn.tnissir§mé:'--._ for Workrnen compensation, Tumkur "'D1s_t:iCtj"~A._ 'i'iim'kur, awarding a Compensation of Rs?.3S,32,OS5§/Si with interest at rate of 12% pa. In M:w§§AN§.9792 2037 S if _B§ff§_NEEN:
Effexv India Assurance Co. Ltd, 'S ' umkur Shopping Complex?
B.H.Roa<:L Tumkur, E\Eow ropressnteci by its Senior' Dévisionai manager, Now mam Exssarancs Co; Lia"
§}sivis%s:}r1a1 €3ff;i:::€ 1\§o.§3, §v'§%'i}?££E' €Zf:s::>::":p§a:~:§ KSEASEEB Mam Road, 'Pésonjga, Eizzngaiosrs ~ 586 €358' axgpeiiant 3 [By Sri. A.N,KrishnasWar:1y, Adv.) AND
1. Smt Jayamma, W/<3 Kaiiuveeriah, New aged about 50 years,
2. Devaraju, S/0 Late Kalluveeraiah, T. Age: Major, " ' Both 1* / 0 Kenchaganahaiifi-."
Nittur Hobii, Gubb; Ta1u1;_.____ jj ._ Tumkur District. V ,_ I3. N.C.B0regc:sw;ia, .
S/0 Chuncif;eg9wd:a, " V Major, R/£5 B3i2akt."ara$1é11i;" if t Kuniga; V Txgryikxm I)-1'.._st" V . . .Resp<}ndents (By 3:2; Pager',."D';:iz<;ureg-gvédai, ':5§d.xr;'§f0r R1 & R2. RS_:iot._%C¢V_tiisp$§1s_¢xfl._ with V,/3;; dated 1.45.20 11) Tiriiss é'MFAJS"%:vfEi1¢4€i'«--_:%i'::'Eier Secticn 30(1) of W.C. Act against the = juci_gmen:~~' dated 31.53.2007 passed in VVC;';X['CLR~82;'2Q07 on the file of the Labour Officer and 521% '%"VLLlfi":'5.V_E\4.¥!:h:?9B 2:39? BE'I'%?a£'§§;§§_:_ _ %*§gz§%A.'Inéia fixssurance Ce, Ltdw _V "7§'1::i3§<1:::* Shappézig ffisémpiexa % _§3.§*§.R9ad§ T'i,1§I1§§'i_§1} ' Zkésw r€;:>res€::i:€d by Eta Sézzisr Eiaségiaizal mariagsrp 35323? 1315339. Agszzramce Cg; Li:s:L% Qiyisisflai Qfficxsz ?aT§.12, Maya? Camylax, E'~:}Lé;}3§ Main awarding
8. Coéirmgssigner "fer----««'xR70rkrnen Compensation, Turnkur V Di$tri>c':, _ 'i'1;Ini{ur, , V ' V compensatian of
--"x§rith interesi: at rate cf 12% pa. on the file of the Labour Offieer and Commissioner for Wer1<;meI1's Compensation, Tumkur [hereinafter refeififed to as 'Comniissiener' for short}.
2. The following substantial' €;i:e«siiesns_, .ef'v:1a\£% 'V for eensideratien :
1) ii} Whether the Cefiin:iis,si0ne:§Was~_; jig-siifieid iri"
saddling 1iabi.iity appeilent who has issued 9. Meier Peliey it; respect O'f'ti"aet0r and trailer bearingTN0.eI{;{§igO6--/f1'g"ii'547 and 7648. Whei:her udder' i 1.47' the MV Act, the in_sufeer' is", lisbiie -f'p.a_y_f Compensation in ;-res;}ee.t.';7(>f 'e.inp1§)yeesfe' being carried in a goods Veaifrigige a:_1tiA.'fewhe:her 'this provision would ~ ..iAfie1u€ii&3:§.Vris1§;».{_)i' emplefifees who are not being _ ea:5§ied} in vehicle.
A , "I\«7het_he.f'--ei5'm{f'a"et ef Insurance and provisions VWei'law-_eeuid.,be expanded or re~writi:en by the Cei_1:":"mi1eh against the decision ef Five Judge»s.._..Beneh of Apex Court in New India _ Assurance Co. Ltd., V/s Cii\/I.Jaya & ethers, ,,"'ireVperied in AIR 2002 se 651$ iv} .
vii "vie:'1.f.'%§hether limited coverage of empieyees and '*°ihei1* place of work as prevideci under Section 14?' of the MV Aet eouid be enlarged E0 the extent :35 exclusive WC peiiey. The judgment and Order passed by the Cemmissieee? is eppeseel is iaw, prebabiiiiies ef ihe ease anei evieieriee er: reeerci. ikie iefgai preeéeedizzgs er iiii;g;aieies"s either east GE' §I'€S€%:":'§ eéeeeernirig 231:}; eerie sf fee subjeeé maieee sf éhe éispigie is peilfiiifig; V X 'W
3. Brief facts ef the case are, the respeeitive elairnants had filed their respective elaiIn;""'p'€V£i.i_i§§41"{t3 Claiming compensation for the death ef b the road traffic accident that €)CC1l'§f€Ci"3l:' en 19.4.2005 contending that the'~..deeeas'eVd.VA:
were engaged in digging soil to thatfithe said soil is loaded to the traeter. traijler '{?vh'ile'tdischargi11g their duties entrusted' tr) tlrern', death of all the three " -V..ac:.eoti~nt the death ef the deceasved'*pers0ns:;3 stall-the 'ciaimiants herein respectively filed their' elairn ~§jetit»idr:sVV"befere the Commissioner. The said rnatterii for consideration before the ' V' CC}rn°m;issiener eriv-----3.«l'.5.2007. The Commissioner allowed the"'asan_ie..part by awarding eernpensation. Being the impugned judgment and Carder passed Ah}; tliefiiidrnriiissidiier, the appellants ~ insurer in all the l' 'é;hr_e'e eases have presented these appeals seeking _..a;3;:;repriate relief as stated supra.
4. Learned Cedrrsei aeeearirig" fer the appeilant iris ail these three eases at the trait, si:i::reiitted that the if if 1 the hability. Therefore, he submits that the insurance Company is not liable to pay the Compensation itnpugned judgment and order paesed_;""'13§zg___ 'the' Commissioner is liabie to be set aside.
6. As against this, Sri,Pate1:LD.E.aregoi§fie1aév Counsel appearing for all the eiaithants' the 'V Commissioner after efitieal _«''evaluation of the "oral and documentary evvideheemV_av.ai1.ab}?e .--'otiTjfi_1e. has rightly allowed the_Vpetitio1'i%:s "fi1:et§.e"'wVh};T.fAthe Lrs., of the deceased w'or1tri:éQen,V"wh'o' V :."_eti'eeuh;bed to injuries in the aeeidehtx _"?he:f*efot'e, *.t_t1'te_r'fere:1ee in these appeals is uncalled xfor. 'he fairly submits that the Coahhsvei. who fevpreéaented the elaimahte before the .Co.Ihm_isws1ofier has not examined the owner of the tractor tttaileh"a§;_v..te~fiehether the deceased \VQYkl'I1€}§1 died in the aee4i»:1eht,a"If'herefore, he submits that an appropriate oiiregztion may be issued, remahdihg the matter for Vzjeeoheideratioh to meet the ehtie ofjoetieeg P'?
5. After ea:'efui1y eeheitierihg the eehthieeiohe ef the Eearhea Coziaheei &§§)€%£iF§£1§§ to? the appehaht ~ ihearer W,NW,,~W.s 'fa :
er 10 before the Commissioner and is not participating in the present proceedings aiso.
9. Having regard to the facts and "
the case, all these appeals filed byffhe'a.ppeii§ifii'4e%_iiis$}§ei: V' are hereby allowed in part. The o:f<fie'rs by the Commissioner for Work:iien's eomiperissaifiofidated V' 31.5.2007 in WCA/Cif{:~<.{3i,32';'§'.i§f;i§G.? ai'e""i1'ei*eby set aside. Matter stands for 'Noriqnehfs reconsider the same and in accordance with law aiiid as expeditiously as possible,' a period of six months, froifiigithe daite» of Copy of this judgment, after opoortunities to both the parties to adduce H a€ieii:ioi1é;i., e\:i'cie':1ee; ii' any V " Aihourit in deposit by the appellant in ail the three 'zgigseais shah be refunded, immediateiy, ii directed to return the LCR to the for W0:'1s::n€n's cempensation, '{'u1'§j;¥§ur, Office is Commissioner immediatély. '~ ._% -M*,§a§§§ = .'%§:';"
' VUEGE vsk / ~