- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10952 MFA No. 20514 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 20514 OF 2012 (MV-I) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. ASLAM S/O. NABI RASUL AGE: 23 YEARS, EX- COOLIE, R/O. NEAR DODDA MASJID MILLER PETH BALLARI, DIST: BALLARI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. HANUMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADV) AND: 1. SRI. PANDU AGE: MAJOR, PARTNER OF VARALAKSHMI RICE MILL, ADONI ROAD, SIRUGUPPA, DIST: BALLARI. 2. SRI. GANGADHAR AGE: MAJOR, PARTNER OF VARALAKSHMI RICE MILL, ADONI ROAD, SIRUGUPPA, DIST: BALLARI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRIYUTHS. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY AND SOUBHAGYA S. VAKKUND, ADVS FOR R1 & R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.30(1) OF WC ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & ORDER DTD:18-05-2010 PASSED IN WC NO.304/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER & COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMENS COMPENSATION, SUB-DIVISION-I, BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.03 11:08:52 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10952 MFA No. 20514 of 2012 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This appeal is filed by the petitioner, being dissatisfied by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Labour Officer and Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Sub-division-I, Ballari (‘the Commissioner’ for short) in WC No.304/2008 vide judgment dated 18.05.2010. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: 2.1. The petitioner was working as a Coolie under respondents No.1 and 2 (owners). On 02.04.2008 while fitting an angular in Varalakshmi Rice Mill, an angular bolt came out, and fell down from 25 ft. height on the Petitioner, and he sustained injuries. The petitioner was working as a Coolie, and getting salary of Rs.200/- per day. The petitioner has sustained a grievous injuries, as a result he could not work as he used to work before the accident. Hence, he has filed a claim petition under Section 22 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10952 MFA No. 20514 of 2012 3. The owners filed a statement of objections denying that there exists any relationship as employer and employee between the petitioner and the owners i.e., the respondents herein. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the owners. 4. The Commissioner, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 5. The petitioner to substantiate his case, examined himself as PW-1 and examined the doctor as PW-2 and marked nine documents as Exs.P1 to P9. The respondents/ owners neither led any oral evidence nor produced any documents. 6. The Commissioner, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgment dated 18.05.2010 and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,90,304/- with interest to the petitioner payable after 30 days from the date of accident. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10952 MFA No. 20514 of 2012 7. The petitioner being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Commissioner, filed this appeal. 8. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the owners. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, the Commissioner has taken the monthly income at Rs.3,600/-, which is contrary to the schedule notified under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923. He submits that, the monthly income has to be assessed at Rs.4,000/-. Hence, he submits that, the compensation awarded by the Commissioner is on the lower side, and accordingly, prays to enhance the compensation by allowing the appeal. 10. Per contra, learned counsel for the owners submits that, there exists no relationship as employer and employee between the owners and the petitioner. The owners are not liable to pay the compensation as claimed by the petitioner. Hence, she prays to dismiss the appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10952 MFA No. 20514 of 2012 11. This Court admitted the appeal on 04.10.2016 to consider the following substantial question of law: Whether the Commissioner is justified in awarding compensation by taking the salary of the petitioner at Rs.3,600/- per month, as it is contrary to the schedule of the Workmen’s Compensation Act? 12. There is no dispute that the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries while working in the rice mill owned by Sri. Pandu and Sri. Gangadhara i.e., Varalakshmi Rice Mill Factory; on 02.04.2008, an angular bolt came out, and fell down from 25 ft. height on the petitioner, and he sustained grievous injuries. Admittedly, the petitioner is aged 20 years old as of the date of accident, wherein the Commissioner while assessing the monthly income, has taken his monthly income at Rs.3,600/-, which is on the lower side. This Court re-assesses the monthly income of the petitioner at Rs.4,000/-. The petitioner was aged about 20 years as of the date of accident. The factor applicable to - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10952 MFA No. 20514 of 2012 the age group of the petitioner is ‘224.00’. The percentage of disability assessed by the Commissioner is 60%. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to a compensation of Rs.3,22,560/- (Rs.4,000/- x 60% = Rs.2,400/- x 224 x 60%) as against Rs.2,90,304/-. 13. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed-in-part; ii. The impugned judgment dated 18.05.2010 in WC No.304/2008 passed by the Commissioner is hereby modified; iii. The petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.3,22,560/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. after one month from the date of accident till the realization of the amount; iv. The owner is directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10952 MFA No. 20514 of 2012 v. The petitioner is not entitled to interest for a period of 185 days as per order dated 26.11.2012. SD/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE PA CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2