Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

The Secretary vs Sri Hemanna on 27 March, 2018

                        1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018

                     BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO

              MFA NO.4302/2011 (WC)

BETWEEN:

THE SECRETARY
APMC DAVANAGERE
DAVANAGERE 577002
                                      ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI C S PATIL ADV.- ABSENT)

AND

1.    SRI HEMANNA
      S/O SANNAPPA @ MAHADEVAPPA
      AGED NOW 42 YEARS,
      R/O BANNIKODA GRAMA,
      HARIHARA TALUK,
      DAVANAGERE DIST 577002

2.    SRI K G SURESHA
      S/O JAYADEVAPPA
      MAJOR, CONTRACTOR
      NO.1356, 10TH MAIN,
      4TH CROSS, M.C.C B BLOCK,
      DAVANAGERE. 577002
                               ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI REUBEN JACOB & D.P. MAHESH, ADVS.
FOR R-1 - ABSENT
R-2 SERVED)
                             2




     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF W.C. ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.12.2010 PASSED
IN WC/CR.NO.215/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE
LABOUR    OFFICER    AND   COMMISSIONER  FOR
WORKMEN COMPENSATION, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT,
DAVANAGERE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF
RS.91,498/- WITH INTEREST @ 12% P.A.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                      JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellant is absent, no representation.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by the Labour Officer & Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Davanagere in W.C./C.R. 215/2008 dated 13.12.2010.

3. The brief facts of the case is that on 15.7.2008, when the claimant was working under respondent No.2 herein in the APMC Yard, Davanagere on temporary basis, he sustained injuries on the right leg, hip and spinal chord due to fall of RCC roof,. Hence, 3 the claimant filed claim petition before the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation seeking compensation. The learned Commissioner after hearing the respective parties and considering the entire materials on record has awarded total compensation of Rs.91,498/- with interest at 12% p.a. under different heads. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed.

4. Since the matter is not represented and there are no grounds to admit the appeal. However, compensation awarded by the learned Commissioner is just and proper. Hence, the appeal is rejected.

Sd/-

JUDGE DM