- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3755 OF 2022 (ECA) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6208 OF 2021 IN MFA No. 3755/2022 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. ISMAIL @ K P ISMAIL S/O. PAKRU SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, 2. SMT. ZULEKHA W/O. K. P. ISMAIL, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT KIRIMANJESHWARA VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT. 3. SMT. NOOJAHAN W/O. LATE RIYAZ, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, 4. MINOR NASEEN @ RIYAN AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, 5. MINOR RIZWAN AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS, 6. MINOR RISHAN AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 APPELLANT NO.4 TO 6 ARE CHILDREN OF LATE RIYAZ APPELLANT NO.4 TO 6 ARE MINORS AND REPRESENTED BY THEIR NEXT FRIEND/MOTHER, APPELLANT NO.3, APPELLANT NO.3 TO 6 ARE RESIDENTS OF THONDEMAKKI MAYYADI VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NAGARAJA HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING PARTNER M/S. MANSOOR BROTHERS, ANISHA MANZIL, MARAVANTHEE VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, SRI. LAXMINARASIMHA COMPLEX, OPP. K.S.R.T.C. DEPOT, VODERHOBLI, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS BRANCH OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P.B. RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 11.06.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.05.2020 PASSED IN ECA NO. 11/2017 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES COMPENSTAION AT KUNDAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 6208/2021 BETWEEN: UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BRANCH OFFICE SRI LAXMINARASIMAIHA COMPLEX OPP K.S.R.T.C DEPOT VODERHOBLI KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS SR. DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED P.B. NO.78, JEWEL PLAZA 1ST FLOOR, MARUTHI VEETHIKA UDUPI-576 101 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. P.B. RAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ISMAIL @ K.P ISMAIL AGED 69 YEARS S/O PAKRU SAHEB 2. SMT ZULEKHA AGED 54 YEARS W/O K.P ISMAIL RESIDENTS OF KIRIMANJESHWARA VILLAGE KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT 576 101 - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 3. NOORJAHAN AGED 35 YEARS W/O LATE RIYAZ 4. MINOR NASEEN @ RIYAN AGED 15 YEARS 5. MINOR RIZWAN AGED 13 YEARS 6. MINOR RISHAN AGED 11 YEARS NO.4 TO 6 ARE CHILDREN OF LATE RIYAZ NO.4 TO 6 ARE MINORS AND REPRESENTED BY NEXT FRIEND MOTHER NO.3 ABOVE NO.3 TO 6 ARE RESIDENTS OF THONDEMAKKI MAYYADI VILLAGE KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT 576 101 7. THE MANAING PARTNER M/S MANSOOR BROTHERS ANISHA MANZIL MARAVANTHE VILLAGE KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT 576 101 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NAGARAJA HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6, VIDE ORDER DATED 03.07.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.28.05.2020 PASSED IN ECA NO.11/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION KUNDAPURA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.12,09,960/- WITH INTEREST AT 12 - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 PERCENT P.A. FROM 25.12.2016 UNTIL ITS REALIZATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT These two appeals are arising out of judgment passed in ECA No.11/2017 dated 28.05.2020 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and Commissioner for Employees' Compensation at Kundapura (for short, 'the Commissioner'), whereby the Commissioner partly allowed the claim petition filed by the claimant and awarded compensation of Rs.12,09,960/- with 12% interest from 25.12.2016 until its realization. 2. The brief facts of the case are, Riyaz (deceased) was working as a driver under respondent No.1-employer in a lorry bearing registration No.KA-20-D-747. On 25.11.2016 at about 02:10 p.m., when Riyaz was driving the said lorry from Concolim towards Margoa side near Dandewadi, Chinchinim, Salcete, Goa State on NH-17, the lorry met with an accident with motorcycle bearing registration No.GA-08-AJ-2470 and turtled and dashed against the tree. As a result, the Riyaz - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries. As such, his legal representatives filed claim petition before the commissioner claiming compensation for his death. 3. The commissioner, upon assessment of oral and documentary evidence, partly allowed the claim petition as stated supra. The said judgment and award is challenged by the claimants in MFA No.3755/2022 and by the Insurance Company in MFA No.6208/2021. 4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties in both the appeals. 5. Apart from urging several contentions, learned counsel for the Insurance Company contended that the Commissioner has grossly erred while granting compensation without considering the employer-employee relationship. According to him, it is not proved before the Commissioner that the deceased was died during the course of employment. It is also not proved that he was employed under respondent No.1. He also contended that the Commissioner has also erred in considering the wages of deceased at Rs.12,000/- per month, - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 though there is a limit/cap for the income. As per Notification dated 31.05.2010, the Commissioner ought to have considered the maximum income at Rs.8,000/- per month. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal filed by the Insurance Company by dismissing the appeal filed by the claimants. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimants contented that employer of the deceased was examined as PW.2 and in his testimony he has categorically admitted that the deceased was employed under him and the accident was caused during the course of employment. As such, the employer-employee relationship is proved beyond reasonable doubt. Further, he also contended that the Commissioner is justified in considering the income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/- per month, since he was the driver of the lorry. According to him, in view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and Division Bench of this Court while considering the income of the deceased, the actual monthly wages drawn by the deceased-employee would have to be taken into consideration and not the monthly income notified under - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 Section 4(1B) of the Employees' Compensation Act (for short 'the Act'). Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the impugned judgment and award so also other documents made available before this Court. 8. As could be gathered from records, the occurrence of accident and death of Riyaz in the said accident are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the lorry was insured with insurer. Further, on careful perusal of the evidence of PW.2-the owner of lorry has categorically stated in his evidence that the deceased was employed under him as a driver and the accident was caused during the course of employment. In such circumstances, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that the accident was not caused during the course of employment cannot be accepted. 9. On further perusal of evidence of PW.2, it could be seen that he was paying a monthly salary of Rs.20,000/- to the deceased, however, the Commissioner has assessed the income - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 of the deceased at Rs.12,000/-, since there was no credible evidence to substantiate his actual monthly income. The accident is of the year 2016, though as per the notification the income was fixed at Rs.8,000 per month, in view of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case Managing Director BAMUL vs. Smt. Nirupama and Others in MFA No.6905/2018, the proceedings under the Employees' Compensation Act, the statutory cap on monthly wages is no longer required to be applied and the actual monthly wages established by acceptable evidence are liable to be taken into consideration for computing compensation. 10. In view of the above finding of the Division Bench of this Court, I am of the considered view that the Commissioner is justified in considering the income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/- per month income, since he was a driver of the lorry and was possessing Heavy Motor Vehicle driving license so also the accident taken place in the 2016 i.e., after lapse of six years from the date of Notification. Further, the Commissioner also justified in adopting appropriate factors, however, the - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010223212022 NC: 2026:KHC:40467 MFA No. 3755 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6208 of 2021 Commissioner has failed to grant any compensation on the head of funeral expenses. 11. In terms of Section 4(4) of the Employee's Compensation Act, the claimants would be entitled to Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses. 12. The appeal filed by the claimants is allowed in part and appeal filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed. The apportionment of compensation amount shall be in terms of the award of the Tribunal. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal. Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12