Sunil vs Sri Putte Gowda

SUNIL vs Sri Putte Gowda

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Feb 20, 2024

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1892051

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1892051
Court: Karnataka High Court
Judge: C.M. Poonacha
Decided On: Feb 20, 2024
Case Number: MFA/3072/2014

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SUNIL

Respondent

Sri Putte Gowda

Excerpt

.....he had joined the employer as a helper and during the course ofthe said employment injuries were sustained. the employer who is the proprietor of the respondent has examined himself and has stated that the injured is a minor and they came inside the printing press and meddled with the printing equipments, as a result of which, the injuries have been sustained.7. the commissioner has appreciated the oral anddocumentary evidence and has assessed the income at `500/- per month and further noticing the injuries has awarded a total compensation of `66,670/- assessed the income of `1,716/-, applied the relevant factor of 228.54 and assessed the loss of earning capacity at 17% and accordingly awarded compensation.8. it is forthcoming that the claimant is a 13 year old boy and is represented in the proceedings by his mother. further, the commissioner has adequately appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record and awarded compensation.9. upon re-appreciation of the same and having regard to the fact that scope of consideration as contemplated under section -5-30 of the act, wherein the judgment of the commissioner can be interfered with only on a substantial question of law, the appellant has failed in demonstrating that the judgment of the commissioner is liable to be interfered with by this court in the present appeal.10. in view of the same, the followingorderi) the appeal is dismissed. ii) the judgment dated 28.08.2012 passed in wca no.wob - 1/eca/nfc/cr 23/2011 by the labour officer and commissioner for workmen compensation, sub division - 1, bengaluru is affirmed. sd/- judge bs list no.: 1 sl no.: 23

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3072 OF 2014 (WC) BETWEEN:
1. SUNIL
S/O JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS MINOR, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT PARVATHAMMA BOTH R/A NO.24, 1ST MAIN 1ST CROSS, KAMALANAGAR BANGALORE-560079 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R SHIVU REDDY., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI PUTTE GOWDA S/O HANUMAIAH Digitally AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS signed by
BHARATHI S         PROPRIETOR
Location:          M/S MANJUSHREE PRINTERS
HIGH COURT         NO.9/2, 1ST G CROSS
OF KARNATAKA 8TH MAIN, 3RD STAGE 4TH BLOCK, BASAVESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE-560079 …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF W.C.ACT AGAINST THE

JUDGMENT DATED 28.8.2012 PASSED IN WCA.NO.WOB-

1/ECA/NFC/CR 23/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN COMPENSATION, SUB DIVISION-1, BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING FURTHER ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. -2- THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

1. The above appeal is filed by the workman challenging the

judgment dated 28.08.2012 passed in WCA No.WOB -

1/ECA/NFC/CR 23/2011 by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Sub Division - 1, Bengaluru1.

2. The parties will be referred as per the rank before the Commissioner.

3. Claiming compensation for the injuries sustained during the

course of his employment, the claimant filed a petition under Section 22 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act2 arraying the employer as a respondent. The employer entered appearance before the Commissioner and contested the case of the Workman. The Commissioner, upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record has allowed the petition filed by the Workman and awarded a compensation of Hereinafter referred to as the Commissioner’ Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’. -3- `66,670/-. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed by the workman seeking for enhancement of compensation.

4. This Court by its order dated 18.12.2021 has admitted the above appeal and framed the following substantial question of law:

(i) Whether the learned Commissioner has adopted the correct principles of law in computing the compensation awarded?

5. It is forthcoming from the records of the Commissioner

that the workman had stated that when the claimant was carrying out of his employment with the employer he sustained the accident, wherein there was traumatic amputation of right great toe at its proximal phlynx level and second toe at middle phalanx level part hanging by flexor tendon. The medical records discloses that the surgery of the distal phlynx of the right toe of the middle phlanx level part has been done. The Doctor has been examined who has stated regarding the treatment undertaken which discloses that the workman was treated as an in patient for two days. He has further stated that the workman has disability at 13% to the whole body. -4-

6. The workman has examined himself and has stated that he had joined the employer as a helper and during the course of

the said employment injuries were sustained. The employer who is the proprietor of the Respondent has examined himself and has stated that the injured is a minor and they came inside the printing press and meddled with the printing equipments, as a result of which, the injuries have been sustained.

7. The Commissioner has appreciated the oral and

documentary evidence and has assessed the income at `500/- per month and further noticing the injuries has awarded a total compensation of `66,670/- assessed the income of `1,716/-, applied the relevant factor of 228.54 and assessed the loss of earning capacity at 17% and accordingly awarded compensation.

8. It is forthcoming that the claimant is a 13 year old boy and is represented in the proceedings by his mother. Further, the Commissioner has adequately appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record and awarded compensation.

9. Upon re-appreciation of the same and having regard to the fact that scope of consideration as contemplated under Section -5-

30 of the Act, wherein the Judgment of the Commissioner can be interfered with only on a substantial question of law, the Appellant has failed in demonstrating that the judgment of the Commissioner is liable to be interfered with by this Court in the present appeal.

10. In view of the same, the following

ORDER

i) The appeal is dismissed. ii) The Judgment dated 28.08.2012 passed in WCA No.WOB - 1/ECA/NFC/CR 23/2011 by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen compensation, Sub Division - 1, Bengaluru is affirmed. Sd/- JUDGE BS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23

Same Court & Year Karnataka · 2024 Same Parties SUNIL vs Sri Putte Gowda Same Judge C.M. Poonacha