SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 25700

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
B M SHYAM PRASAD AND SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
SRI SHAKILAHMAD S/O. BABUSAB KANAVALLI – Appellant
Versus
SHRI HONNAIAH SHIVANNA – Respondent
MFA 104018/2023



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.104018 OF 2023 (ECA)

BETWEEN:

SRI. SHAKILAHMAD S/O. BABUSAB KANAVALLI AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER (PRIOR TO ACCIDENT)

R/O. 2ND CROSS, NETAJI NAGAR, IJARI LAKAMAPUR, HAVERI, TQ. AND DIST: HAVERI-581110.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.M.PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

VISHAL 1. SHRI. HONNAIAH SHIVANNA NINGAPPA S/O. SHIVANNA SHIDDAIAH, PATTIHAL AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA R/O. PROP DELUX CARGO MOVERS, PATTIHAL Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA NO.25/2 SHARADHA ARCADE MARUTI DHARWAD BENCH FORM DOMBARA HALLI LAXMIPURA RD DASAPURA HOBALI, KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-562162.

(OWNER OF LORRY MH. 09/EU6753).

2. THE MANAGAR (LEGAL CLAIM)

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., 2ND FLOOR, BANNIGIDA STOP, BELLAD AND COMPANY, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI- 580030/

(POLICY NO. 23152040, 58805300000 VALID FROM 06/03/2021 TO 06/03/2022)

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYKUMAR K.KOTIN, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI. IRANAGOUDA K.KABBUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.05.2023, PASSED IN ECA.NO.11/2021, ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, HAVERI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION;

AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)

This appeal is filed by the claimant under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter after referred to as ‘Act’ for brevity) to enhance the compensation by modifying the judgment and award dated 06.05.2023 passed in ECA No.11/2021 by Additional Senior Civil Judge and Commissioner for Employees' Compensation, Haveri (hereinafter after referred to as ‘Comissioner’ for brevity) and also fix the liability to pay the compensation on respondent No.2 i.e., insurance company.

2. The facts leading to filing of claim petition are as under a. That the appellant was working as driver of the lorry bearing No.MH-09/EU-6753 under respondent No.1 since from 05 years. The appellant was getting daily wages of Rs.600/- and Batta of Rs.300/-. The appellant was getting Rs.27,000/- per month. The said lorry was insured with respondent No.2 - insurance company. The said lorry bearing No.MH-09/EU-6753 was driven by the appellant on 09.06.2021 towards Gujarat from Bengaluru for unloading electronic material. When the said lorry was flying on Haveri -Hubballi NH-4 road near Sherewad road on 10.06.2021 at about 11.45 a.m., the said lorry was dashed to another going lorry. The driver of the said lorry did not stop the said lorry. Due to the said accident, the appellant has sustained grievous injuries i.e., 1) fracture of neck of right femur, 2) traverse fracture mid shaft right femur. 3) traverse fracture mid shaft of left femur, severe injuries to the stomach, other multiple and grievous injuries all over the body. The appellant took the treatment and spent Rs.6,50,000/- towards medical expenses. The accident occurred during the course of employment. Due to the accident, the appellant has suffered permanent physical disability and has lost earning capacity. The appellant has filed claim petition under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

b. Respondent No.1 who has appeared through his counsel but has not filed any statement of objections.

c. Respondent No.2 -insurance company has filed statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and sought for dismissal of the claim petition. Respondent No.2 in its objection has not admitted the insurance policy coverage to the vehicle and conten

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top