- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3852 MFA No. 204154 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 204154 OF 2024 (ECA) BETWEEN: DUNDAPPA S/O HANAMANTH BADIGER @ HARIJAN, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: MASON WORK (NOW NIL), R/O: TALIKOTI, TQ: MUDDEBIHAL, DIST: VIJAYAPURA. NOW RESIDING AT GANESH NAGAR, IBRAHIMPUR, VIJAYAPURA – 586 101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V.BIRADAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NCC COMPANY LIMITED, 301 BATAVIA CHAMBERS, KUMBARA KRUPA ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. PITA MOHAN GOVINDRAO AGE: MAJOR, OCC: PROJECT MANAGER OF SUJI INFRASTRUCTURE COMPANY, R/O: DANAPUR, TQ: HOSPET, DIST: BELLARY-583 101. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ICICI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., A.K. ASIAN GRAND, 3RD FLOOR, NEAR MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA, OPP: GESCOM HEAD OFFICE, STATION ROAD, KALABURAGI – 585 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE APPELLANT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.10.2023 PASSED BY PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION, VIJAYAPURA IN ECA NO.08/2020. Digitally signed by RAMESH MATHAPATI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3852 MFA No. 204154 of 2024 THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL JUDGMENT Though appeal is listed for admission, with consent of learned counsel for parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 2. Challenging judgment and award dated 16.10.2023 passed by Principal Senior Civil Judge and Commissioner for Employees' Compensation, Vijayapura (for short, 'Commissioner') in ECA no.8/2020, this appeal is filed. 3. Sri Sanganagouda V.Biradar, learned counsel submitted, appeal was by employee for enhancement of compensation. It was submitted, claimant was employed as Mason in respondent no.1-Company on daily wages of Rs.500/-. As per instructions, he was working at bridge work site. Said construction site was insured with respondent no.3- insurer for liability under provisions of Employees Compensation Act. On 15.05.2019, while working at construction site as per instructions of employer, claimant lost balance and fell down from roof of godown under construction - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3852 MFA No. 204154 of 2024 and sustained grievous injuries to his vertebra. Despite taking treatment at Sidda Basava Hospital, Talikoti and Bijapur Multispeciality Hospital, Vijayapura, he did not recover fully and sustained permanent physical disability. Claiming compensation, he filed claim petition under Section 22 of Employees Compensation Act, 1923 against employer and insurer. 4. On service of summons, respondents no.1 and 2- employer/Supervisor filed objection admitting that claimant was employed with it, but denied income as claimed. Asserting that work site was insured with respondent no.3, indemnification was claimed. Insurer opposed petition denying age, occupation and income of claimant. Based on pleadings, Commissioner framed issues and recorded evidence. Claimant examined himself and Dr.S.V.Havinal as PWs.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P17. No oral evidence was led by respondents, but copy of insurance policy was got marked with consent as Ex.R1. 5. On consideration, Commissioner held relationship of employee and employer, occurrence of incident during course - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3852 MFA No. 204154 of 2024 and out of employment and claimant being entitled for compensation were established. Determining age of claimant at 35 years, his monthly income at Rs.10,000/-, disability at 20%, it awarded compensation of Rs.2,36,472/- towards loss of earning by applying factor of 197.06. Apart from above, Commissioner awarded Rs.1,17,908/- towards medical expenses. Dissatisfied with same, appeal was filed. 6. It was submitted as per deposition of PW.2- Dr.S.V.Havinal, claimant sustained traumatic fracture of D-9 vertebra leading to paraplegia with bowel and bladder incontinence. In view of above, Commissioner ought to have considered loss of earning capacity at 100% and awarded compensation. It was submitted, substantial question of law about assessment of disability being contrary to material on record would arise for consideration and sought for answering same by allowing appeal. 7. On other hand, Sri Manjunath Mallayya Shetty, learned counsel for respondent-insurer opposed appeal. It was submitted, even if there was some scope for enhancement, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3852 MFA No. 204154 of 2024 same would be offset by consideration of higher income than permissible and therefore, there was no merit in appeal. 8. Heard learned counsel. Perused impugned judgment and award. 9. From above and since appeal is on quantum with regard to assessment of disability and monthly income, following substantial question of law would arise for consideration: “Whether assessment of monthly income at Rs.10,000/- and loss of earning capacity at 20% was contrary to material on record?” 10. From above, relationship of employer-employee, occurrence of incident during course of employment and out of employment and insurer being liable to pay compensation are not in dispute. Only question is about correct monthly income and extent of loss of earning capacity. Insofar as monthly income, Commissioner considered Rs.10,000/- as monthly income notionally. In view of issuance of Notification no.SO.1258(E) dated 31.05.2010 under Section 4(1B) of Employees Compensation Act, 1923, Commissioner was not - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3852 MFA No. 204154 of 2024 justified in taking income at Rs.10,000/- per month, same has to be considered at Rs.8,000/-. To establish loss of earning capacity, claimant relied on deposition of PW.2-Dr.S.V.Havinal. PW.2 who had issued Ex.P15-Disability certificate deposed that due to injuries sustained namely, fracture of D9 vertebra, claimant was suffering from paraplegia with bowel and bladder incontinence. In case of paraplegia, assessment of earning capacity has to be at 100%. Commissioner rightly determined age of claimant as 35 years and applied factor of 197.06. Thus, re-computation of compensation towards loss of earning capacity would be as follows: Rs.8000/- X 60% X 197.06 X 100% = Rs.9,45,888/-. 11. Apart from above, claimant would be entitled for medical expenses assessed by it at Rs.1,17,908/-. Thus, claimant would be entitled for total compensation of Rs.10,63,796/-. 12. Thus, substantial question of law is answered accordingly. ORDER (a) Appeal is allowed. Judgment and award dated 16.10.2023 passed by Principal Senior Civil - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3852 MFA No. 204154 of 2024 Judge and Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Vijayapura, in ECA no.8/2020 is modified. Claimant is held entitled for total compensation of Rs.10,63,796/- as against Rs.3,54,400/- awarded by Commissioner with interest at 12% per annum from date of incident i.e., 15.05.2019 till date of deposit. (b) Respondent-insurer is directed to deposit enhanced compensation within six weeks. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE NB/SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51 Ct: Vk