Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.48 seconds)
The National Insurancce Company Ltd vs Sri C.Ramudu 4 Ors on 18 October, 2022 cites

Hanumantha Gowda vs Devaraju on 31 May, 1995

In other cases Section 2(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act provides that whether the injury or injuries incapacitated a workman for all work which he was capable of performing at the time of the accident resulting in such disablement. The Commissioner has got jurisdiction to adjudge and determine. The Commissioner no doubt has adjudicated it keeping in view the effect of injuries and opining that the injured was not capable of performing the driver's job and the injuries have rendered the injured totally incapacitated from performing the job of driver. No evidence led by the owner or by the insurance company to prove or show that the claimant was at the time of accident capable of performing any other job or was doing any other business. Looking to the fact that the claimant was incapacitated because of injuries on the left hip joints resulting in shortening the leg by half an inch and injury of the left hand wrist incapacitated the respondent- petitioner from performing the job of driver. It can well be said that 2 1998 SCC online Kar 748 12 the driver was subject to the total disablement for the work which he was capable of performing at the time of the accident. It cannot be said that the skilled men, who have been performing the skilled special trained job of driver on being disabled to do that on account of injuries caused may opt to do the jobs of sweeper or cobbler, because what has to be looked into is what was the job at the time of accident resulting in disablement he was capable of doing and to do which he was employed. Applying the above test in my view the present has been a case of total permanent disablement. I find support from the observations made by this court in the case of K.P. Hanumantha Gowda v. Devaraju 1996 ACJ 102 (Karnataka). It will be appropriate to quote the following observation of the said decision:
Karnataka High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

K. Janardhan vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr on 9 May, 2008

8. The question of loss of earning capacity resulting from amputation of one the legs in the case of a tanker driver was considered by this Court in K.Janardhan v. United India Insurance Company Limited and another, (2008) 8 SCC 518. In that case, a tanker driver suffered serious injuries in a motor accident and as a result, his right leg was amputated upto the knee joint. He made a claim under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation held that disability suffered by him as a result of the loss of the leg was 100% and awarded compensation to him on that basis. In appeal, the High Court, like in the present case, referred to the Schedule to the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 and held that the loss of a leg on amputation amounted to reduction in the earning capacity by 60% and, accordingly, reduced the compensation awarded to the tanker driver. This Court set aside the High Court judgment and held that the tanker driver had suffered 100% disability and incapacity in earning his keep as a tanker driver as his right leg was amputated from the knee and, accordingly, restored the order passed by the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 141 - H S Bedi - Full Document
1