VAISHALI SATAPPA IRGAR v. APPAYYA CHANDRAKANT RAMANNAVAR
MFA/24042/2013 · 2025-07-10
Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 62439 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 62439 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8549 MFA No. 24042 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.24042 OF 2013 (WC) BETWEEN:
1. SMT. VAISHALI SATAPPA IRAGAR, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
2. KUMAR KIRAN S/O. SATAPPA IRAGAR, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
3. KUMAR KISHORE S/O. SATAPPA IRAGAR, AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
SINCE APPELLANTS NO.2 AND 3 BEING MINORS R/BY HIS MOTHER APPELLANT NO.1. ALL ARE R/O: H NO.80, 1ST MAIN, 3RD CROSS, SHIVAJI NAGAR, BELAGAVI. … APPELLANTS (BY SRI. ASHOK A. NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI APPAYYA CHANDRAKANT RAMANNAVAR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: PLOT NO.2245, SECTOR NO.11, M.M. EXTENSION, BELAGAVI-16. 2. THE MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., PATULLOS ROAD, CHENNAI-600 002. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHREEVASTA S. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8549 MFA No. 24042 of 2013
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30 OF WC ACT, 1923, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:
18.02.2011 PASSED IN WCA.SR NO.66/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMENS COMPENSATION, SUB-DIVISION- II, BELGAUM AND AWARD COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR)
This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 18.02.2011 passed in WCA.SR- 66/2010 on the file of Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation Sub-Division-II, Belgaum, contending that the monthly wages taken by the Commissioner is Rs.4,000/- p.m. only, but it ought to have been Rs.8,000/- p.m.
2. Heard the arguments from both sides and perused the materials placed on record. - 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8549 MFA No. 24042 of 2013
3. The occurrence of accident, death of the deceased and coverage of insurance are not in dispute in this case. 4. The claimants being legal heirs have filed the claim petition. The Trial Court has awarded compensation of Rs.3,73,800/- along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. thirty days after the date of accident till deposit. 5.
The grounds urged by the counsel for the appellants that the Trial Court has taken monthly wages of the deceased at Rs.4,000/-, but it ought to have been Rs.8,000/-. Admittedly, in the present case, the date of accident is 06.04.2010. The Central Government by its notification has increased monthly wages to Rs.8,000/- with effect from 31.05.2010. As on that day, the gazette notification published appointing the date of considering the increased monthly wages. The accident is on 06.04.2010, which is before amended date of coming into force of the amendment. Therefore, learned Commissioner
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8549 MFA No. 24042 of 2013
is correct in holding monthly wages at Rs.4,000/- and accordingly, granted compensation. Hence, there is no good ground available to interfere with the judgment and award passed by the Trial Court. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 7. Registry is directed to transmit TCR along with copy of this judgment to the Trial Court. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE
SRA CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 20