Karnataka High Court
The Branch Manager vs Thimmaiah P on 16 March, 2023
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
MFA No. 8257 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 10353 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8257 OF 2018 (WC)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 10353 OF 2018(WC)
IN MFA 8257/2018
BETWEEN:
SRI. THIMMAIAH. P @ THIMMAIAH THALAVAR
S/O PEDDANNA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/O C/O N PRAKASH
JOGIMATTI RAOD
NEAR SUNNADAGUMMI
CHITRADURGA CITY - 577501
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. V B SIDDARAMAIAH.,ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by AND:
PANKAJA S
Location:
HIGH 1. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BRANCH OFFICE
JAGALUR MAHALINGAPPA COMPLEX
DAVANAGERE ROAD
CHITRADURGA - 577501.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
BRANCH MANAGER
2. SRI BRAMARAMBIKA MALLIKARJUNA
GINNING AND PRESSING
BY ITS PROPRIETOR
CHAGAN JAGANMOHAN REDDY
S/O YANAYDHIREDDY
-2-
MFA No. 8257 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 10353 of 2018
MAJOR
R/O KODAGANUR VILLAGE - 582114
GADAG ROAD, GAJENDRA GADA
RON TALUK, GADAG DISTRICT
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. L SREEKANTA RAO.,ADVOCATE FOR R1:
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH
V/O DATED:10.07.2019)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF WORKMEN
COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED:08.08.2018 PASSED IN ECA NO.28/2017 ON THE FILE
OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & CFEC,
CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
IN MFA 10353/2018
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE
JAGALUR MAHALINGAPPA COMPLEX
DAVANAGERE ROAD
CHITRADURGA - 577501.
NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGER SAI PRAKASH N
REGIONAL OFFICE
SHUBARAM COMPLEX
M G ROAD, BANGALORE-560001.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. L.SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE)
-3-
MFA No. 8257 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 10353 of 2018
AND:
1. THIMMAIAH P
@ THIMMAIAH THALAVAR
S/O PEDDANNA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/O C/O N PRAKASH
JOGIMATTI ROAD
NEAR SUNNADAGUMMI
CHITRADURGA CITY-577501.
2. SRI BRAMARAMBIKA MALLIKARJUNA
GINNING AND PRESSING
BY ITS PROPRIETOR
CHAGAN JAGANMOHAN REDDY
S/O YANAYDHIREDDY
MAJOR
R/O KODAGANUR VILLAGE - 582114
GADAG ROAD, GAJENDRA GADA
RON TALUK, GADAG DISTRICT
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V.B.SIDDARAMAIAH., ADVOCATE FOR R1:
R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED )
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF WORKMEN
COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED:08.08.2018 PASSED IN ECA NO.28/2017 ON THE FILE
OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & CFEC,
CHITRADURGA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. 5,47,000/-
WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
MFA No. 8257 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 10353 of 2018
JUDGMENT
1. These appeals are by the insurer as well as by the employee.
2. The employee preferred a claim under the provisions of the Employees Compensation Act contending that he suffered an accident during the course of his employment under respondent No.2 and was hence entitled for the compensation.
3. The trial Court after considering the case put before it, came to the conclusion that the claimant did suffer an accident during the course of his employment and he was entitled to a compensation of Rs.5,47,000/-. The Tribunal has also gone on to hold that the insurer was liable to pay the compensation since there was an insurance policy issued by it and despite a direction to produce the terms and conditions of the policy, the insurer has not produced the same.
4. The substantial question of law that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether the trial Court was -5- MFA No. 8257 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 10353 of 2018 justified in fastening the liability on the insurer in the light of the fact that the insurer had issued a policy to cover the stocks and process and was essentially an insurance policy covering the industrial manufacturing risk.
5. Annexure-R1 - Insurance policy states as follows:
Type of Description of the Typed of Sprinkle FEA Sum Insured Escalation propert property in the Constructio r Disc Dis Percentag y block n c e ON STOCKS OF COTTON HYBREED Stocks KAPAS & COTTON Pucca No NA Rs. NA in HYBREED 2,00,00,000.0 process SEED,COMMERCIA 0 L COTTON SEED, KAPAS, LINT & PRESSED BAILS Description of property covered Cotton Gin and Press Houses, Section IV-Industrial Manufacturing Risk STFI Deletion No RSMD Deletion No Past Claims Experience Ratio NA Silent Risk No Storage during Silent Period No
6. A reading of the said clause indicates that the policy of insurance only covered the stocks in process and any -6- MFA No. 8257 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 10353 of 2018 industrial manufacturing risk arising out of the use of the cotton gin and press house. The policy does not cover the risk of any accident to any of its employees.
7. In light of the fact that the policy was fundamentally issued to cover any perils arising out of manufacturing process and the stocks in trade, it would be impermissible to make the insurer liable for the liability on account of an accident to an employee.
8. The finding of the Tribunal regarding liability cannot be sustainable and the same is set aside. The question of law is accordingly answered holding that the insurer cannot be made liable for the liability on account of the accident of the employee.
9. As far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the employee at Rs.8,000/- and has awarded a sum of Rs.4,72,000/- as compensation and Rs.75,000/- towards medical expenses. In my view, this assessment cannot be found fault with.
-7-MFA No. 8257 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 10353 of 2018
10. Therefore, there is no merit in the appeal of the employee as regards quantum is concerned and therefore it is dismissed and the appeal filed by the insurer is allowed.
11. It is hereby made clear that the insurer would not be liable for payment of the compensation for Rs.5,40,000/- and the employee would be at liberty to proceed against his employer namely Sri Bramarambika Mallikarjuna Ginning and Pressing - respondent No.2 herein and recover the same.
12. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be refunded to the insurer.
Sd/-
JUDGE HA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34