The assessment of compensation for permanent disability under the Workmen's Compensation Act depends on the effect and impact of the disability on the claimant's earning capacity, and the Commissioner has the discretion to determine the loss of earning capacity based on the nature of the employment and the impact of the injury on the claimant's ability to perform their duties.

JUDGMENT

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, J. - There was no representation on behalf of the respondents on 28.06.2022. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed under caption, 'for Judgment'.

2. Even today also i.e., on 01.07.2022, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents, despite the matter being listed under the caption, 'for Judgment'. Hence, this Court is constrained to dispose of the Appeal on merits.

3. The present Appeal is filed aggrieved by the order dated 19.04.2004 in W.C. No. 9 of 2003 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation & Assistant Commissioner of Labour-I, Guntur.

4. The parties are arrayed as per the ranking in W.C. No. 9 of 2003.

5. The brief facts of the case are that, the appellant herein-claimant filed the claim petition, before the Commissioner's Workmen admitting the injuries sustained in the accident, that occurred on 08.07.2002. He filed this petition claiming compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/-. The opposite party no. 1, who is the employer has admitted that the claimant had worked as an employee/cleaner on the mini-lorry bearing No. AP 303T 4669.

6. The opposite parties have filed their counter affidavits.

7. The opposite party no. 2, in the counter affidavit, denied the averments made in the claim petition in toto and he stated that the fractures received by the claimant were united and the disability is 30%. He admitted that the claimant is the cleaner of the lorry of the opposite party no. 1. The Commissioner's Workmen, after considering the oral and documentary evidence had granted compensation of Rs. 74,985/- besides stamp duty of Rs. 150/- totalling to Rs. 75,135/-.

8. Aggrieved by the said order dated 19.04.2004, the present Appeal is filed by the claimant stating that the Commissioner's Workmen has erroneously awarded less compensation and he has not taken into consideration the disability of the appellant as 100% and erroneously taken the certificate issued by the Doctor. As per the Doctor's evidence, the injured-claimant is not able to squat and is limping with stiffness of the knee and hip joint. It is difficult for him to perform the duties of natural calls also. The physical disability certificate issued by the Doctor is about 30% which is permanent and it is difficult for him to work as cleaner of the lorry as prior to the accident.

9. For better understanding the relevant para of the order dated 19.04.2004 is extracted as hereunder:-

'AW.II deposed that the applicant was admitted in Critical Care Hospital, Kothapet, Guntur on 03.08.2002 and he operated the applicant and skin grafting was done. The fracture was immobolised wit POP causing above knee left side. The patient was discharged on 19.08.2002, with discharge card. At present, the patient was having difficulty in squatting. The fracture was united. The patient is having limping with stiffness of the knee and hip joint. It is difficult to perform the duties of nature calls also. The physical disability of the applicant is about 30% which is permanent and partial in nature. It is difficult to work as cleaner of the lorry. Ex A5 was issued by him and Ex A4 was issued by the GGH/Guntur.'

Without considering this aspect, the petitioner was awarded lower amount of compensation.

10. When an applicant-claimant suffer a permanent disability as a result of the injuries the assessment of compensation under the head of loss of future earnings would depend upon the effect and impact of such permanent disability or his earning capacity.

11. For the said proposition, this Court relies on the Judgment of this Court in C.M.A. No. 800 of 2007, dated 04.01.2021, wherein, the Doctor issued the Certificate of disability at 60% and the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation had arrived at 100% disability and granted compensation. The learned Judge after considering the plethora of decisions, relied on the Judgment in 'Gona Siva Sankar Vs. K. Vara Prasad and Others 2006 ACJ 2089,' in somewhat similar circumstances in para no. 6 observed as