Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 71624 (KAR)

M/S SANGAMESHWAR COFFEE ESTATE LTD v. SMT THATHU

MFA/4423/2018 · 2025-07-16

C M Poonacha

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1969 OF 2017 (WC) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4423 OF 2018 (WC) IN MFA No. 1969/2017 BETWEEN: M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE, CHIKKAMAGALURU, THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR, SUMANGALA COMPLEX LAMINGTON ROAD, HUBLI - 580 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.S. UMESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. THATHU W/O SEENA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/A KARADI KHAN ESTATE SANGAMESHWARAPETE POST CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 136. 2. M/S SANGAMESHWARA ESTATE (KARADI KHAN ESTATE) SANGAMESHWARAPETE POST, BHARATHI H M Digitally signed by BHARATHI H M Location: HIGHCOURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 CHIKKAMAGALUR TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 136. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K VENKATE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1; SRI. P.D. VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.10.2016 PASSED IN ECA NO.196/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & CJM, CHIKKAMGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.6,27,320/- WITH INTEREST @ 12% P.A. FROM AFTER 30 DAYS OF ACCIDENT TILL PAYMENT. IN MFA NO. 4423/2018 BETWEEN: M/S SANGAMESHWARA ESTATE LTD., (KARADI KHAN ESTATE) SANGAMESHWARAPETE POST, CHIKKAMAGALUR TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. VISHWANATH P.D, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. THATHU W/O SEENA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/A KARADI KHAN ESTATE SANGAMESHWARAPETE POST CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK - 577 101. 2. M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.S. UMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. K. VENKATE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1)(a) OF EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01.10.2016 PASSED IN ECA.NO.196/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CJM, CHIKKAMAGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.6,27,320/- WITH INTEREST AT 12% P.A. AFTER EXPIRY OF 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE ACCIDENT TILL THE DATE OF PAYMENT. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT The above appeals are filed under Section 30(1)(a) of the Employee's Compensation Act, 19231 calling in question the judgment and award dated 01.10.2016 passed in ECA.No.196/2014 by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge 1 Hereinafter referred to as 'Act' - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 & C.J.M., Chikkamagaluru2. Hence, both the appeals are taken up together for consideration. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred as per their rank before the Tribunal. 3. The relevant facts in a nutshell leading to the present appeals are that, claiming compensation for the death of deceased on 31.07.2013, the mother of the deceased filed a claim petition under Section 22 of the Act contending, inter alia, that when the deceased was working as a coolie in the estate owned by the 1st respondent, he accidentally fell from a tree, due to which, he sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same in the hospital on 03.08.2013. The owner of the estate was arrayed as the 1st respondent and the Insurer with whom the 1st respondent had taken a workmen's compensation policy was arrayed as the 2nd respondent. It was the further case of the claimant that the deceased 2 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’ - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 was earning a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month and hence, adequate compensation was sought. 4. The 1st respondent-employer entered appearance before the Tribunal and filed statement of objections admitting that the deceased was an employee of 1st respondent. It was further averred that the daily wages being paid to the deceased was Rs.195.82 at the time of the accident and that all the employees of the 1st respondent had been insured with the 2nd respondent- Insurer. 5. The 2nd respondent-insurer entered appearance before the Tribunal and filed statement of objections admitting the policy of insurance. However, the wages as averred in the claim petition, have been denied. 6. The Tribunal by its judgment dated 01.10.2016 has partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,27,320/- and directed the 2nd respondent-Insurer to pay the same. The Tribunal further - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 directed the 1st respondent-employer to pay interest at 12% per annum on the compensation amount of Rs.6,27,320/-. Being aggrieved, the Insurer has preferred MFA No.1969/2017 and the employer has preferred MFA No.4423/2018. 7. Learned counsel Sri B.S. Umesh appearing for the Insurer vehemently contends that the wages declared by the insurer under the policy of the insurance is Rs.420/- per month. Hence, it is contended that the insurer is liable to pay compensation to the extent of the wages that have been declared by the employer, with the insurer. It is further contended that the premium paid by the employer for 371 employees is Rs.51,060/- and hence, the premium having been collected on the declared wages the compensation payable by the insurer ought to be in terms of the wages declared at the time of issuance of the policy and the premium collected thereon. 8. Per contra, learned counsel Sri K.Venkate Gowda appearing for the claimants submits that the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 representative of the insurer who was examined as RW.1 has specifically deposed in the examination-in-chief that the wages declared under the policy of insurance was Rs.4,255/-. It is further contended that the testimony as deposed by RW.1 in the affidavit by way of examination- in- chief is required to be relied upon and the grounds urged in the appeal by the insurer, which is contrary to the said statement ought not to be accepted. It is also contended that the Tribunal was justified in fastening the liability on the employer to pay interest in view of the fact that admittedly, the interest has been deposited only in the year 2015, that is, more than two years after the occurrence of the accident whereas the employer was required to deposit the amount within 30 days of the same. 9. The submissions of both the learned counsels have been considered and the materials on record including the records of the Tribunal have been perused. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 10. It is forthcoming that the above appeals were ordered to be listed for final hearing and hence, are being listed at the stage of hearing and have been heard. Accordingly, the above appeals are admitted to consider the following substantial questions of law:- i) Whether the Tribunal was justified in considering the wage of the deceased at Rs.5,874.6 and fastening the liability to pay the compensation on the 2nd respondent - Insurer? ii) Whether the judgment of the Tribunal is contrary to the material on record and liable to be interfered with? Re.question No.(i): 11. It is forthcoming from the material on record that the employment of the deceased with the employer is admitted. The employer has averred in the statement of objections that the deceased was drawing a daily wage of Rs.195.82. Accordingly, the Tribunal has calculated the compensation by taking 50% of the monthly wage and multiplying the same with the relevant factor of 213.57 in terms of the schedule to the Act. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 12. The 2nd respondent/Insurer in the statement of objections before the Tribunal has merely denied the assertion of the wages paid as contended in the claim petition. 13. The representative of the insurer who was examined as RW.1 has deposed at para 3 of the affidavit by way of examination-in-chief that the owner/employer has paid total premium of Rs.51,060/- under the policy of insurance and the monthly wages was Rs.4,255/- per employee. 14. In the memorandum of appeal, it is sought to be contended on behalf of the insurer that the wages declared under the policy of insurance is Rs.420/- per month. It is further contended that the premium of Rs.51,060/- having been paid by the insured, for covering 371 workmen, the annul wages would be Rs.16,515.36 and the monthly wage would be Rs.1,376.28. It is thus, contended that the premium is collected as per the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 declared wage and the compensation payable by the insurer would be in terms of the declared wages. 15. The Tribunal while considering the said contention has noticed that RW.1 has admitted in the cross-examination that the employer had submitted the proposal form at the time of obtaining the insurance policy and as per the said proposal form, the insurer had issued the policy of insurance. The Tribunal has further noticed that the said proposal Form has not been produced before the Tribunal. 16. It is pertinent to note here that the grounds urged by the insurer in the appeal have not been averred in the statement of objections filed before the Tribunal. Further, the contention sought to be put forth by the insurer in the present appeal is that the monthly wages per employee would be Rs.1,376.28 is contrary to the testimony of RW.1 in the examination-in-chief where under, it is admitted that the monthly wage would be - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 Rs.4,255/- per employee. Further, as rightly noticed by the Tribunal, the Insurer has not produced the proposal form, wherein the employer has declared the wages on the basis of which, the insurer allegedly calculated the premium, which was collected by the insurer at the time of obtaining the policy of the insurance. 17. Having regard to the aforementioned discussion, it is just and proper that the compensation be calculated by considering the wage of the deceased at Rs.5,874.6 as admitted by the employer of the deceased. Further, it is just and proper that the insurer is fastened with the liability to pay the compensation to the extent of monthly wage of Rs.4,255/- per month and the balance sum of Rs.1,619/- be ordered to be recovered from the employer. 18. Accordingly, substantial question of law No.(i) framed for consideration is answered partly in the affirmative. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 Reg.question No.(ii): 19. While it is sought to be contended on behalf of the employer that he is not liable to pay interest having regard to the fact that the employer deposited a sum of Rs.3,68,675/- in the year 2015, the Tribunal considering the said contention has recorded a finding that as per Section 4A of the Act, the employer is required to deposit requisite amount within 30 days from the date of accident and the amount having been deposited after two years from the date of accident that is in the year 2015, the liability for payment of interest is required to be fastened on the employer. The employer has failed to demonstrate that the said finding is in any manner erroneous and liable to interfere with in the present appeal. Hence, the substantial question of law No.(ii) is answered in the negative. 20. In view of the aforementioned, the following:- - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 ORDER i) MFA No.1969/2017 is partly allowed ii) MFA No.4423/2018 is dismissed; iii) The judgment and award dated 01.10.2016 passed in ECA.No.196/2014 by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge & C.J.M., Chikkamagaluru is modified to the extent of holding that the insurer (appellant in MFA No.1969/2017 / 2nd respondent before the Tribunal) shall be liable to pay a compensation of Rs.4,54,370/- and the employer (Appellant in MFA No.4423/2018 / respondent No.1 before the Tribunal) shall be liable to pay balance sum of Rs.1,72,959.16. The owner shall also be liable to pay the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 12% p.a. iv) The judgment and award dated 01.10.2016 in all other respects shall remain unaltered. v) The amount deposited by the appellant in MFA No.1969/2017 be transmitted to the Tribunal together with the records. vi) From and out of the amount deposited by the Insurer/appellant in MFA No.1969/2017, a sum of Rs.4,54,370/- shall be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursal to the claimant in terms - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26735 MFA No. 1969 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4423 of 2018 of the judgment of the Tribunal. The remaining amount shall be refunded to the appellant. vii) From and out of the amount deposited by the employer before the Tribunal, the compensation of Rs,1,72,959.16 together with interest accrued shall be disbursed to the claimants in terms of the judgment of the Tribunal. The balance amount if any, be refunded to the owner. viii) Registry to transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith; ix) Registry to draw the modified award accordingly. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29 CT: BHK