- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010531912016 NC: 2026:KHC:39730 MFA No. 2214 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2214 OF 2016 (WC) BETWEEN: SRI. H. RAMESHA @ RAJU, S/O HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING NO.KA-16/A-7755, H BASAPURA, DAVANAGERE TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT TAGARANAHATTY, SOLLAPURA MAJURE, SIDDAPURA POST, CHITRADURGA TALUK - 577 501. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B M SIDDAPPA .,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. C. MAHENDRAPPA, S/O CHANNABASAPPA, AGE:MAJOR, OWNER OF LORRY BEARING NO.KA-16/A-7755, RESIDING AT B DURGA, HOLALKERE TALUK - 577 526, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE, INSURANCE CO. LTD. REGIONAL OFFICE, SUBRAMANIAN BUILDING, 2ND FLOOR, ANNA SALAI, Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010531912016 NC: 2026:KHC:39730 MFA No. 2214 of 2016 CHENNAI - 600 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R SHASHIDHARA., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. O MAHESH., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF W.C. ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.08.2015 PASSED IN ECA NO.22/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & CFEC-III, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant/workman under Section 30(1) of W.C. Act, challenging the judgment and award dated 20.08.2015 passed in E.C.A.No.22/2014 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge & Additional CFEC-III, Chitradurga. 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and respondent Nos.1 and 2. The ranks of the - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010531912016 NC: 2026:KHC:39730 MFA No. 2214 of 2016 parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience. 3. The Brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was a driver working under the employment of respondent No.1 who is the owner of lorry bearing Reg.No.KA-16/A-7755. The petitioner met with an accident on 20.08.2012 and filed petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.8,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.66,100/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of deposit. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed and mainly contended that the Tribunal has not granted any amount towards disability, loss of income during laid- up period, attendant and nourishment charges and other heads. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010531912016 NC: 2026:KHC:39730 MFA No. 2214 of 2016 5. The following substantial questions of law is framed. "1. Whether the tribunal is right in law holding that the appellant has sustained 13% disability though the evidence on record shows that he has suffered 38% disability. 2. Whether the tribunal is right in law in holding that appellant was earning Rs.4,000/- per month though evidence on record shows that he was earning Rs.8,000/- per month and Rs.200/- per day as bata." 6. Learned counsel for the appellant stated that admittedly, the petitioner was working as a driver with respondent No.1. He contested the matter before the Court but did not cross-examine PW.1. The petitioner was earning Rs.8,000/- per month and also bata of Rs.200/- per day. But the Tribunal has taken the income as Rs.4,000/- per month without any basis. Considering the fact that he met with an accident in the year 2012, as per the General Yearly Minimum Wages Schedule (GYMS), this Court finds it reasonable to take his income as Rs.8,000/- - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010531912016 NC: 2026:KHC:39730 MFA No. 2214 of 2016 per month. As per schedule 1 (Sec.2(1) and Section 4 of the Act, 60% of the monthly income is taken into consideration, which comes to Rs.4,800/- per month (8,000x60%). The petitioner sustained the following injuries: "1. Pain, swelling complains deformity of upper 1/3rd of right leg. 2. Swelling pain, tenderness over left leg, lower 2/3rd. 3. Abrasion 2x3 cms over both legs, 2x3 cm each." As per wound certificate, the above injuries are simple in nature. Ex.P.7 is the discharge card, on its perusal reveals the petitioner was inpatient from 20.08.2012 to 26.09.2012 i.e., 37 days. The petitioner examined doctor as PW.2 and he stated that the petitioner sustained un-displaced fracture of left tibia and comminuted fracture of right fibula at lower 1/3rd by surgery ORFI and plating. PW.2 issued Ex.P.50-disability certificate and stated that the petitioner sustained - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010531912016 NC: 2026:KHC:39730 MFA No. 2214 of 2016 permanent physical disability of 33% to his right lower limb and 5% to his left lower limb. The Tribunal has rightly considered the disability as 13% (33%+5%=38x1/3rd=13%). Considering the medical evidence, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the disability. As per Schedule-4 (Sec.4) of WC Act, the factor for the age group of 32 is 203.85. Accordingly, the compensation comes to Rs.1,27,202/- (4,800x203.85x13%). 7. Hence, the appellant-workman is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.1,27,202/- along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of accident till the deposit. 8. The Tribunal erred in granting interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit and the said rate of interest is erroneous and is set aside. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010531912016 NC: 2026:KHC:39730 MFA No. 2214 of 2016 9. Learned counsel for respondent No.2–Insurance Company stated that, as per Ex.P.56, the petitioner had a valid driving licence to drive the Light Motor Vehicle (NT) as on the date of the accident, whereas he was driving a lorry, which is a Heavy goods vehicle. Therefore, the Tribunal has already held that the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation and exonerated the insurance company from its liability. Therefore, respondent No.1/owner of the vehicle alone is liable to pay Rs.1,27,202/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of accident till the date of deposit, within one month from the date of this order. 10. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 20.08.2015 passed in ECA No.22/2014 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010531912016 NC: 2026:KHC:39730 MFA No. 2214 of 2016 Additional CFEC-III, Chitradurga, is modified. iii. Respondent No.1/owner of the vehicle alone is liable to pay Rs.1,27,202/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of accident till the date of deposit, within one month from the date of this order. iv. On such deposit, appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. v. Respondent No.2 is not liable to pay the compensation. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55