##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:5505 MFA No. 25627 of 2012

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 25627 OF 2012 (WC)

BETWEEN:

THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHAVAPUR, HUBLI.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI SS JOSHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SMT.IRAMMA W/O IRAPPA BADNIKAI @ DEVARMANI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HADLI, TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG.

2. SHRI SHARNAPPA B. JAVALI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: HADLI, TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG.

(OWNER OF LORRY KA-25/2731)

3. SMT.PARATEVVA W/O ULAVAPPA BADNIKAI @

CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI DEVARMANI, AGE: MAJOR, R/O: HADLI,

DCLAHig XAit MNal ADy NR s AK igSA nHT eET dKI M bAy ARNI TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG.

LKD07 oaa c 0 rtena 0: ta i 2toa0 nk2 :a 6 H, .D0 ig 4hh .a1 Cr7wo 2 ua2 rdt : 3 Bo 4ef :n3c0h - …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SM KALWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI PRAVEEN G. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2(ABSENT);

R3- APPEAL IS DISMISSED (V/O DATED 10.03.2026)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.05.2012 PASSED IN W.C.A.C.F. NO.59/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR

WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, GADAG & ETC.

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:5505 MFA No. 25627 of 2012

HC-KAR

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

ORAL JUDGMENT

Challenging judgment and award dated 15.05.2012 passed

by Labour Commissioner and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Gadag (‘Commissioner’ for short) in WCA

no.59/2008, this appeal is filed.

2. This appeal was admitted on 20.09.2016, without

framing substantial question of law. Since, learned counsel submitted that only substantial question of law propounded is about finding of Commissioner on relationship of employer and employee being without any basis following substantial question

of law was framed.

“Whether finding of commissioner about relationship of employer and employee is without any basis and award calls for interference?”

3. Sri S.S Joshi, learned counsel for appellant

submitted, appeal was by insurer challenging finding of Commissioner on relationship of employer and employee and

consequent fastening of liability on insurer.

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:5505 MFA No. 25627 of 2012

HC-KAR

4. It was submitted, in application for compensation

filed under provisions of Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 (‘EC Act’ for short), it was stated, one Irappa son of Ulavappa Badnikai @ Devaramani was employed as cleaner by Respondent no.1 herein in his mini Lorry no.KA-25/2731 and as per instructions of employer on 27.01.2008, when vehicle was proceeding from Hadali village towards Budihal, driver drove it in rash and negligent manner causing Irappa to fall from vehicle leading to his death during treatment. Alleging loss of dependency, application for compensation was filed against

owner/employer and insurer of vehicle.

5. On appearance, owner filed written statement

admitting relationship of employer and employee and employing workman on monthly wages of ₹5,000/- with daily bhata of ₹50/-, and about vehicle being insured with respondent no.2 and employer indemnified by insurer. Insurer filed written statement opposing claim application on all counts including denying relationship of employer and employee and occurrence of

incident in course of employment etc.

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:5505 MFA No. 25627 of 2012

HC-KAR

6. Based on pleadings Commissioner framed issues and

recorded evidence. Claimant wife of deceased examined herself as PW1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P6. No evidence was led by

respondents.

7. On consideration, in view of admission by employer

about employment, Commissioner held relationship of employer and employee was established and claimant entitled for compensation assessed by determining monthly income of deceased at ₹3,500/- applying factor correspo