- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30820 MFA No. 3810 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3810 OF 2022 (ECA) BETWEEN: 1. THE LEGAL MANAGER, CHOLAMANDALAM MS GIC LTD, 1ST FLOOR, 16-1-44, SR COMPLEX, BENDOORWELL, MANGALORE - 575 002. NOW REP. BY THE MANAGER, CHOLAMANDALAM MS GIC LTD., NO.4, 9TH FLOOR, LING 6, GOLDEN HEIGHTS, 59TH C CROSS, 4TH M BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRAIL ESTATE, NEAR SUJATHA TALKIES, BANGALORE - 560 010. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT SHIVAMMA, W/O LATE ANNAPPA @ ANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT BULLAPURA VILLAGE, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK. 2. KUM.ASHA, D/O.LATE ANNAPPA @ ANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT BULLAPURA VILLAGE, Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30820 MFA No. 3810 of 2022 SHIVAMOGGA TALUK. 3. KUM.ANUSHA, D/O.LATE ANNAPPA @ ANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, R/AT BULLAPURA VILLAGE, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK. 4. KARIBASAPPA C, S/O.LATE CHANNABASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O. BULLAPURA VILLAGE, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAKESH A H., ADV FOR R1 TO R3; SRI.KENDULI SHIDARAYA MAHADEVAPPA., ADV FOR 4) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.11.2021 PASSED IN ECA NO.5/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT-6 AND EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION COMMISSIONER, SHIVAMOGGA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.5,95,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 12 PERCENT P.A. FROM 02.11.2017 TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order passed in ECA.No.5/2018 dated 23.11.2021 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Employees Compensation Commissioner, Shivamogga, the appellant/Insurance Company is before this Court questioning the liability. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30820 MFA No. 3810 of 2022 2. The respondent herein has filed the claim petition under Section 22 of the Employees Compensation Act, seeking compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- along with 18% interest for the death of the deceased in the accident that took place on 02.10.2017 during the course of employment. The case of the claimant is that the first claimant is the wife and the second and third claimants are the daughters. The deceased was doing coolie work under respondent No.1, who was his employer. As such, there existed employer-employee relationship between them. Respondent No.1/employer is engaging the services of the deceased as coolie for loading and unloading wet arecanuts to the tractor-trailer. 3. On the date of the accident i.e. on 02.10.2017, the deceased was transporting wet arecanuts belonging to respondent No.1 from Musenal Village to Bullapura Village in tractor-trailer driven by the driver one Prakash. Due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver, the hook of the trailer attached to the tractor broke and the trailer fell down. The deceased who was sitting on the trailer fell on the ground and sustained grievous injuries to his head. Immediately, he was shifted to the hospital at Nanjappa Hospital, Shivamogga for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30820 MFA No. 3810 of 2022 treatment. Later, he was admitted at Father Mullur Medical College Hospital and he succumbed to the injuries on 18.10.2017 at 05.18 a.m. The Trial Court has observed the accident had taken place during the course of employment and as such, he is entitled for compensation of Rs.5,95,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Ninety Five Thousand Only). 4. The Court has examined respondent No.1/employer as RW.2. He has stated that he was engaging the deceased as a coolie from a long time. It is the case that because of negligence of the driver of the tractor the accident had happened. The insurance company is before this Court mainly on the ground that Ex.P.11, i.e., Father Mullur Medical College Hospital, where he was admitted on 10.10.2017, it shows that the alleged accident was due to fall from height at about 08.30 p.m. on 02.10.2017 near Shimoga and it is also relying on Ex.P.12 i.e., the outpatient details, wherein it shows that self falls from tractor at about 08.30 p.m. on 02.10.2017 near Musenal Village, Shivamogga. Basing on these two documents, the learned counsel for the insurance company submits that it is a clear case that it is a self fall and it is a cooked-up story for the purpose of claiming the compensation. It is submitted that - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30820 MFA No. 3810 of 2022 the complaint was given on 08.10.2017 and the accident had taken place on 02.10.2017. It is stated in the complaint with regard to how the accident had taken place. Learned counsel submits that Exs.P.11 and P.12 were filed by them and the documents which were relied on by them are contrary to their own case. The claimants ought to have examined the witnesses in support of their case. It is submitted that the Court has failed to consider all these aspects and granted the compensation. It is submitted that the award needs to be set aside, as the accident had not taken place during the course of employment. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for respondents / claimants submits that the first document that is admission card at 09:50 p.m. in Nanjappa Hospital clearly shows that fall from a tractor and is a accident. He further submits that in the other documents they have only stated about fall from the height, but the first document clearly shows that it is the accident. As such, much credence need not be given to Exs.P11 and P12. It is submitted that there is a consistent evidence of RW.2 who is the employer has stated that he has been engaging the services of the deceased as a coolie in his tractor for a long time and all these things clearly shows that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30820 MFA No. 3810 of 2022 accident happened during the course of employment and he is entitled for compensation and the Court has rightly granted the compensation and no grounds are made out to interfere with the transfer order passed by the Court. 6. Having heard the counsels on either side and perused the material on record. This Court has perused Ex.P11, Ex.P12 and also Ex.P18. In these three documents, Ex.P18 is admission card, which is the first document. In that, it is clearly shown that fall from a tractor is the accident and as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the insurance Company in Ex.P.11 and P.12 the version i.e., shown is different and the FIR is filed after 6 days. This Court finds force in the argument of the learned counsel for the claimant that Ex.P18 is very clear that it is a case of the accident and which is a first document immediately after the accident. Further the evidence of RW.2 who is the employer also strengthens the case of the claimants. In that view of the matter, the Court finds no reason to interfere with the well-considered order passed by the Trial Court. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30820 MFA No. 3810 of 2022 7. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed. i. The amount in deposit shall be forthwith transferred to the trial Court. The insurance company shall deposit the amount, if any with in four weeks and the claimant is at liberty to withdraw. ii. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. iii. No costs. iv. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27