- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17909 MFA No. 6840 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6840 OF 2013 (WC) BETWEEN: SRI NAGARAJA S/O LATE KARIYAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPTD., BY HIS L.R'S 1. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA, W/O LATE NAGARAJA, AGE: 35 YEARS 2. MASTER ABHISHEK N., S/O LATE NAGARAJA, AGE: 16 YEARS, 3. MASTER ABHILASH N., S/O LATE NAGARAJA, AGE: 13 YEARS, 4. MASTER ARUNKUMAR N., S/O LATE NAGARAJA, AGE: 10 YEARS. APPELLANT NO.2 TO 4 ARE MINOR CHILDREN REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE NAGARAJ.) ALL ARE R/O NO.179, HALASINAMARADA DODDI, CHANNAPATNA TOWN, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-571501. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SURESH M LATUR., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17909 MFA No. 6840 of 2013 AND: 1. SRI. H.D. RAJU, S/O DADDAKUNNAIAH, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. NO.2159, ANJANADRI, 5TH CROSS, KUVEMPUNAGAR, CHANNAPATTANA, RAMANAGAR POST, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-571501. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.6, H. SIDDAIAH ROAD, JWALAMUKI COMPLEX, BANGALORE-560002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JANARADHAN REDDY, ADV. FOR R2, V/O DT: 14/07/2016 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH.) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF W.C.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED: 22.06.2013 PASSED IN WCA/B2/NFC/CR- 3/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN COMPENSATION, SUB DIVISION-2, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING FURTHER ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17909 MFA No. 6840 of 2013 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel for the appellants/claimants and learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance company. The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal under Section 30(1)(a) of the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923, aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 22.06.2013 passed in No.DWCA/B2/NFC/CR-3/2008 by the Labour Officer and Employee’s Compensation Commissioner, Bengaluru(for short ‘Commissioner’), whereby the Commissioner awarded a compensation at Rs.2,76,255/- alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum and hence seeking enhancement of compensation, the claimants are before this Court,. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they referred to in the claim petition before the Commissioner, Bengaluru. 3. The brief facts of the case of appellants are as under: The claimants are none other the wife and children of deceased Nagaraja. Deceased Nagaraja was earlier working as a cleaner in the lorry bearing No.KA-01-5974 of respondent - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17909 MFA No. 6840 of 2013 No.1 and on 07.11.2007, when the said lorry reached B.M. Road, near Seshagirihalli, the driver of the said lorry drove the same in high speed in rash and negligent manner and dashed against another lorry bearing registration No.KA-41- 6363, which was proceeding in front of his vehicle and due to the said impact, injured Nagaraja sustained Type 2 compound fracture of both bones of right leg, fracture shaft of femur left leg and other grievous injuries all over the body. He was treated at Sahana Hospital, Kengeri and later as inpatient in Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru. As the claimant sustained said injuries during the course of his employment, he filed a claim petition before the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Bengaluru. However, during the pendency of the said claim petition, Nagaraja succumbed to the injuries on 18.08.2008. Hence, learned counsel for the claimants filed an application under Order 22 Rule 3 r/w Section 151 CPC before the Commissioner for continuation of proceedings by the legal representatives of deceased Nagaraja. The Commissioner, Bengaluru after hearing both sides, awarded a compensation of Rs.2,76,255/- with interest at 12% p.a. after 30 days from the date of judgment. Aggrieved by the in adequacy of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17909 MFA No. 6840 of 2013 compensation awarded, the claimants have filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 4. The claimants have preferred this appeal on the ground that the judgment and award passed by the Commissioner is not in accordance with law. The Commissioner has committed an error in considering the income of deceased Nagaraja at Rs.3,000/- p.m. , which ought to have considered at Rs.4,000/- p.m. Further, the Commissioner has committed an error in taking into consideration the age of the deceased as ‘40’ years, which ought to have taken as ‘36’ years. Hence, the substantial questions of law which have been framed as under:- 1. Whether the Commissioner is correct in considering the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month? 2. Whether the Hon’ble Commissioner is correct in considering the age of the deceased Nagaraja as 40 years? 5. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the Commissioner has erred in assessing the wages of deceased Nagaraja at Rs.3,000/- p.m. , infact, the wage of deceased - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:17909 MFA No. 6840 of 2013 Nagaraja ought to have been taken at Rs.4,000/- p.m. as per the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Hence, he prayed to allow the appeal. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance company submits that the Commissioner has granted fair and reasonable compensation on account of death of deceased Nagaraja and hence, he prayed to dismiss the appeal. 7. As there is no dispute that deceased Nagaraja died due to the accidental injuries which he sustained in the road traffic accident that occurred on 07.11.2007, the relationship of owner and driver and the liability of the Insurer of the lorry, the only point that arises for Court’s consideration in this appeal is:- a. Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Commissioner is just and reasonable or does it call for interference? 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Commissioner, the Court is of the view that the Commissioner has erroneously considered the notional income of deceased - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:17909 MFA No. 6840 of 2013 Nagaraja at Rs.3,000/- p.m. in the absence of proof of income. Infact, the notional income of the deceased ought to have been taken at Rs.,4000/- p.m. as per the Employee’s Compensation Act. Since, this is a case where the death has taken place due to the accident and during the course of his employment, the assessment has to be determined as per Section 4(1) (a) of Employees Compensation Act, 1923. As per Section 4(1) (a) of the Employees Compensation Act, where death results from the injury, an amount equal to fifty per cent of the monthly wages of the deceased is to be multiplied by the relevant factor. As per Section 4 of the Employees Compensation Act, the proper factor specified in the second column of Schedule IV to the age of deceased at ’40’ years is 184.17. Hence, the amount of compensation works out to: Rs.4,000 x 50% x184.17 =Rs.3,68,340/- Hence, the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.3,68,340/- as against Rs.2,76,255/- awarded by the Commissioner, Bengaluru. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:17909 MFA No. 6840 of 2013 a. The judgment and award dated 22.06.2013 passed in DWCA/B2/NFC/CR-.3/2008 by the Labour Officer and Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Bengaluru is modified to the extent stated hereinabove. b. The claimants are entitled for additional compensation of Rs.92,085/- together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum after 30 days from the date of the judgment. c. Respondent No.2– Insurance Company is directed to deposit enhanced compensation amount together within interest at 12% p.a. within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. d. On deposit of enhanced compensation, the entire enhanced compensation shall be disbursed to the claimants on proper identification. e. No order as to costs. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE MN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22