- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17292 MFA No. 7908 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7908 OF 2016 (WC) BETWEEN: M/S. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SVR COMPLEX, 203, MYTHRI ARCADE, KANTHARAJ URS ROAD, SARASWATHIPURAM, MYSORE – 570 009. REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER, NOW REPRESENTED BY IT LEGAL MANAGER, M/S. ICICI LOMBARD GIC LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, THE ESTATE, 9TH FLOOR, DICKENSON ROAD, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 042. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.C.SHIVANNE GOWDA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BOREGOWDA, S/O. MOTEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT 2ND CROSS, CHIKKEGOWDANA DODDI VILLAGE, KOTHATHI HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 571 401. 2. SMT. SHYLAJA, W/O. KRISHNA, MAJOR, R/AT MALAVALLI ROAD, GUTHALU, MANDYA CITY – 571 401. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR H.B., ADVOCATE FOR R1; Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17292 MFA No. 7908 of 2016 SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 16.04.2025; R2-SHYLAJA) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.08.2016 PASSED IN ECA NO.51/2014 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANDYA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,47,795/- WITH INTERST @ 12% P.A. WITH FROM THE DATE OF ACCIDENT (i.e.11.04.2007) TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PART HEARD, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in E.C.A.No.51/2014 dated 16.08.2016 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Mandya, the Insurance Company is before this Court. 2. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant during the course of the employment. It is the case of the claimant that he is working as a loader and un-loader. On 11.04.2007 at around 5.30 p.m. as per the directions of the owner, he was unloading the cement loads from the lorry and at that time, the driver of the lorry moved the lorry in a rash and negligent manner. Thereby, cement bags fell from the lorry on the part of the legs of the claimant. Thereby, he sustained - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17292 MFA No. 7908 of 2016 grievous injuries. He was inpatient in the hospital and suffered fractures on both bones of right leg. Thereby, surgery was conducted by implanting the rod on 30.04.2007 and he has spent not less than Rs.50,000/- towards 'medical expenses'. The Tribunal had granted an amount of Rs.1,47,795/-. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant - Insurance Company submits Ex.P2(1) to 2(6) - accident register extract shows that he was admitted in the hospital at 9.00 a.m. As per the other records, the accident had taken place at 5.30 p.m. It is the contention of the counsel for the Insurance Company that the accident had not occurred during the course of employment and even prior to the accident, he was admitted in the hospital. When the accident had not occurred during the course of employment, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. It is submitted that when Exs.P2 to 6 were already marked and when this contention is raised on behalf of the Insurance Company, the same was not considered. 4. On the last occasion, there was no representation on behalf of the respondents. Hence, having heard the counsel - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17292 MFA No. 7908 of 2016 for the appellant, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'part heard'. Today also, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents. As this is an appeal of 2016, this Court is proceeding to pass the order on the merits of the matter. 5. Having heard the leaned counsel for the appellant, perused the material on record. Exs.P2 to 6 is the accident register extract, which is filed by the claimant, which shows that he was admitted at 9.00 a.m. to the hospital. All other documents shows that the accident had occurred at 5.30 pm. In those circumstances, this Court is of the view that there is force in the argument of the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company and nobody is examined in support of the said document and even the order is silent. There is no discussion in the order with regard to this document. In these circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to remand the matter so that both the parties would get an opportunity to put forth their case and the Court would be able to give a finding on the same. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17292 MFA No. 7908 of 2016 6. Accordingly, the judgment dated 16.08.2016 passed in E.C.A.No.51/2014 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Mandya, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. i) Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. ii) The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the Tribunal and shall be kept in Fixed Deposit. iii) All the contentions are left open for the parties and the Tribunal shall dispose of the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this Judgment. iv) No costs. v) Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE KA Ct: Sn