Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
UDAY UMESH LALIT, INDU MALHOTRA, JJ.
Sri Chanappa Nagappa Muchalagoda – Appellant
Versus
Divisional Manager, New India Insurance Company Limited – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 9306 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 31909 of 2017)
Decided On : 10-12-2019
Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 – Section 4 – Injury in course of employment – Appellant suffered 37% disability in his whole body and could not perform work of a truck driver any longer – Enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,90,390/- with 12% Interest awarded by High Court – Functional disability of Appellant was increased to 60% by High Court – Appellant has got permanently incapacitated to pursue his vocation as a driver – Prospect of securing any other manual labour job is not possible, since he would require assistance of a person to ensure his mobility and manage his discomfort – As a consequence, functional disability suffered by Appellant must be assessed as 100% – Functional disability of Appellant is assessed as 100% and relevant factor would be 201.66 as per Schedule IV to Act – Compensation payable to Appellant would work out to Rs. 4,83,984/- – Appellant has not been awarded any amount towards reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by him, either by Commissioner or by High Court – Appellant underwent hospitalization for a period of 65 days’ for medical treatment and surgical operations – Lump sum amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards hospitalization and medical expenses incurred by Appellant awarded – Insurance Company directed to pay enhanced amount of compensation to Appellant alongwith 6% Interest. (Paras 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13)
Facts of the case:
Present Civil Appeal has been filed by Appellant – Claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded to him by Karnataka High Court (Dharwad Bench) under Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923.
Findings of Court:
As a consequence of accident, Appellant has been incapacitated for life, since he can walk only with the help of a walking stick. He has lost the ability to work as a driver, as he would be disqualified from even getting a driving license. The prospect of securing any other manual labour job is not possible, since he would require the assistance of a person to ensure his mobility and manage his discomfort. As a consequence, the functional disability suffered by Appellant must be assessed as 100%.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
INDU MALHOTRA, J.
Leave granted.
1. The present Civil Appeal has been filed by the Appellant – Claimant for enhancement of the compensation awarded to him by the Karnataka High Court (Dharwad Bench) under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923.
2. The Appellant – a driver of heavy vehicles, was employed by one Sekar Santharam. On 13.05.2006, while he was driving a truck bearing No. MH-08H-0390 loaded with sand from Islampura towards Ratnagiri, he lost control of the truck due to an axle cut, and dashed against a rock on the side of the road.
As a consequence, the truck turtled thrice, and the Appellant suffered grievous injuries all over his body. The truck was insured with the Respondent – Insurance Company.
3. The Appellant suffered from serious injuries in his right leg by an Anterior Cruciate Ligament and a Collateral Ligament Tear. Plastic surgery was performed on his right leg. This led to his right leg getting permanently injured, which resulted in complete disability to continue his vocation as a driver of a heavy motor vehicle.
The Appellant underwent hospitalization for a total period of 65 days, first in Government Hospital, Ratnagiri between 13.05.2006 and 01.06.2006 and thereafter, in KIMS Hospital, Hubli between 17.06.2006 and 26.08.2006.
4. The Appellant filed a Claim under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (“the Act”) before the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Sub-Division 2 – Belgaum (“Commissioner”) against the Truck Owner and the Insurance Company, praying that an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- be awarded to him as compensation.
5. The Truck Owner filed his Written Statement, wherein he admitted the factum of the accident and the injuries suffered by the Appellant. He submitted that he was paying Rs. 4,000/- p.m. and Rs. 30 batta per day to the Appellant.
6. Dr. S.D. Patil – a Knee Specialist from Belagavi who had examined the Appellant, deposed that the Appellant can neither stand for a long period of time, nor can he fold his legs. He was required to use a walking stick, and could not lift heavy objects. Dr. Patil opined that the Appellant suffered 37% disability in his whole body, and could not perform the work of a truck driver any longer.
7. The Commissioner assessed the Appellant’s income at Rs. 3,000/- p.m., and held that he had lost 50% of his earning capacity. Since the Appellant was 33 years old at the time of the accident, 201.66 was taken as the relevant factor as per Schedule IV to the Act. Accordingly, the compensation was computed at Rs. 1,81,494/-. The Respondent – Insurance Company was held liable to pay the amount awarded.
8. The Appellant filed MFA No. 1569/2008 before the Karnataka High Court (Dharwad Bench) for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Commissioner.
The High Court accepted the income of the Appellant at Rs. 4,000/- p.m. as per the statement made by the employer. Insofar as the functional disability of the Appellant was concerned, the Court held the assessment by the Commissioner at 50% was on the lower side, and increased it to 60%, since the Appellant could no longer earn his livelihood as a driver, and could not even stand for a long time.
The compensation was accordingly enhanced to Rs. 2,90,390/- with Interest @12% p.a. payable from one month after the date of the accident.
9. Aggrieved, the Appellant has filed the present Civil Appeal before this Court for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the High Court.
We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, and perused the pleadings on record.
It is the admitted position that the Appellant can no longer pursue his vocation as a driver of heavy vehicles. The medical evidence on record has corroborated his inability to stand for a long period of time, or even fold his legs. As a consequence, the Appellant has got permanently incapacitated to pursue his vocation as a driver.
This Court in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and Ors., (2011) 1 SCC 343 held that:
“10. Ascertainment of the effect
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
