The central legal point established in the judgment is the liberal interpretation of the Workmen's Compensation Act, emphasizing the employer's role in estimating loss of earning capacity and the need to prove total permanent disablement despite specified injuries.

M. RAMA JOIS AND BALAKRISHNA, JJ.

( 1 ) HEARD. Appeal admitted.

( 2 ) BY consent of the learned Counsel on both sides, the matter is taken up for final hearing, heard and disposed of by this judgment.

( 3 ) THIS appeal is preferred by the appellant who was a workman employed as a Driver in the karnataka State Transport Corporation, Bangalore (hereinafter called 'the Corporation') against the Award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Labour Officer, Hubli sub-Division, Hubli (hereinafter called 'the Commissioner') on 16. 8. 1985 in No. WCA/nf/28/1983 wherein he held that the appellant is entitled to receive compensation at 60% of the permanent total disablement compensation which works out to a sum of Rs. 20,160/- out of the total claim of Rs. 33,600/- together with simple interest at 6% per annum commencing from one month after the date of accident and also a penalty of 20% of the compe- (sic) on account of default of the Corporation in depositing the compensation awarded within 30 days of the date of accident. The grievance of the appellant is that he ought to have been awarded 100% of the permanent total disablement compensation.

( 4 ) THE undisputed facts of the case, briefly stated, are these:

The appellant was an employee of the Corporation and on 16-7-1983 while he was driving bus bearing registration No. MYF 8830 from a place called Byadgi to Hireke-rur, an on coming luxury bus bearing registration No. TNJ 7599 driven rashly and negligently collided against his vehicle at Motebennur village as a consequence of which the appellant sustained severe injuries on his right leg which necessitated amputation of the right leg at its junction of middle and lower third (Guilotine) in July 1983 and subsequently a revision amputation below the knee was performed by the Doctor at K. M. C. Hospital, Hubl. At the relevant period of the accident, the appellant was drawing wages of Rs. 707-55 per month in the range of Rs. 700-800 per month. The Wage Slip produced by the appellant in evidence is Ex P-1. The Commissioner determined that the description of the injury fell under Sr. No. 19 of Schedule I and Part II of the Workmen's compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter called 'the Act') and that percentage of loss of earning capacity was 60% and awarded a compensation of Rs. 20,160/- as against the claim of Rs. 33,600/ -. The Corporation did not appeal against the award.

( 5 ) AT the time of hearing, we asked the learned Counsel for the Corporation as to whether the appellant has been or could be provided with any alternative employment. Learned Counsel submitted that as a matter of fact question of finding an alternative employment to the appellant was examined and as there was no job which the appellant could do, the Corporation found no alternative than to remove the appellant from service.

( 6 ) THE short point for consideration before us is whether the Commissioner was justified in estimating the loss of earning capacity at 60% and whether the Commissioner has adopted the proper basis for estimating the loss of earning capacity and whether the appellant suffered a total loss of earning as distinguished from partial loss of physical capacity and is therefore entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 3 3,600 / - instead ofrs. 20,160/ -.

( 7 ) IN order to find the answer to the question we have to look to clauses of Section 4 (a), (b) (c) of the Act and the relevant part of Schedule II and Schedule IV. They read;

4. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the amount of compensation shall be as follows, namely (

a) Where death results from the injury and the deceased workman has been in receipt of monthly wages tailing within limits shown in the first column of Schedule IV the amount shown against such limits in the second column thereof; (b) Where permanent total disablement results from the injury and the injured workman has been in receipt of monthly wages falling within limits shown in the first column of Sche

Click Here to Read the rest of this document