Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 55759
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT
MFA No.8740/2012 (WC)
C/W.
MFA No.9113/2012 (WC)
IN MFA No.8740/2012
BETWEEN
SRI NAVEEN KUMAR
PROPRIETOR
M/S. YOGITHA ENTERPRISES
"SHREE DHANYA", NO.1-108(3)-17
PRAGATHI NAGARA, NEAR RAILWAY BRIDGE
KULLALI, HOSABETTU
MANGALORE-570 003
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. THRIBHUVAN K., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. K. RAMA BHAT AND ASSTS., ADVOCATE)
AND
1.
SMT. GEETHA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
W/O. LATE ANIL KUMAR
2
2.
MASTER AKHIL
S/O. LATE ANIL KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS
3.
KUMARI GREESHMA
D/O. LATE ANIL KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS
(NO.1 IS THE WIFE AND NOS.2 AND 3 ARE
MINOR CHILDREN OF LATE ANIL KUMAR
MINORS ARE REP. BY THEIR MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN AND ALL ARE RESIDENT
OF THAIKADAPURAM, NILESHWARAM
A.P. ROAD,
KASARGOD DIST - 671 314,
KERALA STATE)
4.
SRI. N. SHASHIDHARAN
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
S/O. NAANAN,
R/AT. VACHIYALIL VEEDU
KADAKAIRAN,
TRIVANDRUM - 695 001,
KERALA STATE
5.
SRI. MAHABALA SUVARNA
P.W.D. CONTRACTOR
MAJOR,
DANDAKERI, YEYYADI
MANGALORE-575 008
DHAKSHINA KANNADA
6.
THE CHAIRMAN
KARNATAKA BANK LTD.
3
PUMPWELL-575 003
MANGALORE
DHAKSHINA KANNADA
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MEGHA CHANDRA D.N., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 AND R3 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED. BY R1;
SRI. UDAYA PRAKASH MULIYA, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
SRI. K.V. SHYAMAPRASAD ADVOCATE FOR R6;
R4 - SERVICE HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED
U/S 30(1) OF W.C. ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD
DATED:29.05.2012
PASSED
IN
WCA
NO.WCA/CR, 52/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR
OFFICER
AND
COMMISSIONER
FOR
WORKMEN
COMPENSATION,
SUB-DIVISION-1,
MANGALORE,
DHAKSHINA KANNADA, AWARDING A COMPENSATION
OF RS.2,46,428/- WITH INTEREST @ 12% FROM
08.06.2006 TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.
IN MFA No.9113/2012
BETWEEN
MR. MAHABAL SUVARNA
A/A 75 YEARS
P.W.D. CONTRACTOR
DANDAKERI, YEYYADI
MANGALORE-575 001,
D.K.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI UDAYA PRAKASH MULIYA ADVOCATE)
4
AND
1.
SMT. GEETHA
W/O. LATE ANIL KUMAR
A/A 34 YEARS
2.
MR. AKIL
S/O. LATE ANIL KUMAR
A/A 15 YEARS
3.
KUMARI GRISHMA
D/O. LATE ANIL KUMAR
A/A 17 YEARS
(RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT
THAIKADAPURAM,
NILESHWARAM, A.P. ROAD,
KASARGODU-671121
KERALA STATE)
4.
SHASHIDHARAN
S/O. NANAN, A/A 68 YEARS
R/AT. VAYALIL VID,
KADAKYREN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
KERALA STATE
5.
NAVEEN KUMAR
M/S YOGITHA ENTERPRISES
CONTRACTOR
SHREE DHANYA
D.NO.1-108 (3)-17
PRAGATHI NAGAR,
NEAR RAILWAY BRIDGE
5
KULAI-HOSABETTU-574227
MANGALORE
6.
KARNATAKA BANK
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
PUMPWELL-575001
MANGALORE
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. THRIBHUVAN K., ADVOCATE FOR K. RAMA
BHAT AND ASSTS, FOR R5;
SRI K.V. SHYAMAPRASADA, ADVOCATE FOR R6
R2 AND R3 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY R1;
R4 SERVICE HELD SUFFICIENT;
R1 - SERVED;)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED
U/S 30(1)(A) OF W.C. ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD DATED PASSED IN WCA.NO.CR/52/2007
ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND
COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN COMPENSATION,
DAKSHINA KANNADA, SUB-DIVISION-1, MANGALORE
AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.2,46,428/-
WITH INTEREST @ 12% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF
PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
These appeals are respectively at the instance of
respondent Nos.3 and 1 calling in question the legality
6
and validity of the award dated 29.05.2012 in
WCA/CR-52/2007F passed by the Labour Officer and
Workmen's
Compensation
Commissioner,
Sub-
Division-I, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada.
The only substantial question of law arising for
consideration in these appeals is, whether the
employer and employee relationship between these
appellants and the deceased has been proved before
the learned Commissioner and whether the findings
recorded by him in the affirmative are in accordance
with law.
There is no dispute about the fact that the
deceased Mr. Anil Kumar while working as a Tiles
fixing workman in the execution of construction of a
building for Karnataka Bank, which was respondent
7
No.2, met with construction accident and he died on
08.05.2006 by falling on the construction site. The
case put forth before the Labor Commissioner was
that respondent No.2 - Karnataka Bank had handed
over the contract work for construction to respondent
Nos.3 and respondent No.1 was a Sub-Contractor
under respondent No.3 (both are appellants before
this Court now). The learned Commissioner after
examination of entire evidence has recorded the
findings that the contract was taken by respondent
No.3 who is the appellant Sri. Naveen Kumar in
MFA.8940/2012 and the Sub-contract was taken by
respondent No.1 - Mahabala Suvarna who is the
appellant in MFA.9113/2012. Further, after perusal of
the
evidence
placed
before
him,
the
learned
Commissioner has recorded a finding that the
deceased who was a workman in the execution of the
8
said work, for which contract was taken by respondent
No.3
and
as
a
sub-contractor
worked
under
respondent
No.3
for
which
the
contract
from
Karnataka Bank was taken by respondent No.1, has
met with construction accident and he had died. The
above finding of the learned Commissioner is fully
supported by the evidence placed on record and such
findings being based on legal evidence, in these
appeals filed under Section 30 of the Employees
Compensation Act, the same is not liable to be
interfered with by this Court. In that view of the
matter, I do not find any substantial question of law
arising
for
consideration
in
these
appeals
and
accordingly appeals are dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to
the learned Tribunal for disbursal of the same to the
claimants.
9
Transmit the records also forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SBS*/NM/-
