High Court of Karnataka Enhances Compensation for Widow of Deceased Workman in Workmen's Compensation Case. Multiplier Method Applied Based on Age and Notional Income Under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Smt. Sanni @ Savitha, widow of deceased Sannu Gonda, filed an appeal under Section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 against the judgment and award dated 18.05.2015 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Kundapura in ECA No.33/2014, seeking enhancement of compensation. The deceased was working as a Compressor Driller under Respondent No.1 in a Mahendra Tractor bearing Regn.No.KA-20-N-2883. On 5.2.2012, during the course of employment, he met with an accident, sustained severe head injury, and died on the spot. The appellant, as his legal heir, filed a claim petition under Sections 8 and 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act seeking compensation. The Tribunal partly allowed the claim and awarded compensation. The appellant, being dissatisfied, preferred this appeal for enhancement. The High Court, after hearing both sides, considered the notional income of the deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month, applied the relevant multiplier of 217.38 as per Schedule IV based on the deceased's age (25 years), and calculated loss of dependency as Rs.6,000 x 50% x 217.38 = Rs.6,52,140/-. Additionally, funeral expenses of Rs.2,500/- were awarded. The court set aside the Tribunal's award and enhanced the compensation to Rs.6,54,640/- with interest at 12% per annum from the date of accident till deposit. The respondent-insurance company was directed to deposit the enhanced amount within six weeks.

Headnote

A) Workmen's Compensation - Computation of Compensation - Multiplier Method - The court considered the proper method for calculating compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for death of a workman, applying the multiplier based on age as per Schedule IV, and determining loss of dependency based on notional income. Held that the Tribunal erred in applying a lower multiplier and notional income, and enhanced compensation accordingly (Paras 5-8).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for the death of a workman is just and proper, and whether the appellant is entitled to enhancement.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. The judgment and award dated 18.05.2015 in ECA No.33/2014 is set aside. The appellant is entitled to compensation of Rs.6,54,640/- with interest at 12% per annum from the date of accident till deposit. Respondent No.2-insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount within six weeks.

Law Points

  • Workmen's Compensation Act
  • 1923
  • Section 4
  • Schedule IV
  • multiplier method
  • loss of dependency
  • notional income
  • funeral expenses
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (KAR) (06) 61

MFA NO.9007 OF 2015 (WC)

2019-06-07

K. Somashekar

Sri. Manjunath. A, Sri Nagaraja Hegde, Sri. M. P. Srikanth

Smt. Sanni @ Savitha

Sri Venkataramana Sherigar, The New India Insurance Co., Ltd.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal under Section 30(1) of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 against judgment and award of Tribunal seeking enhancement of compensation for death of workman.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the death of her husband.

Filing Reason

Dissatisfaction with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

Previous Decisions

The Senior Civil Judge, Kundapura in ECA No.33/2014 partly allowed the claim petition and awarded compensation.

Issues

Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper? Whether the appellant is entitled to enhancement of compensation?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the Tribunal erred in taking a lower notional income and multiplier, and sought enhancement. Respondent-insurance company opposed the appeal, supporting the Tribunal's award.

Ratio Decidendi

The compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for death of a workman should be computed based on notional income, applying the multiplier as per Schedule IV corresponding to the age of the deceased, and adding funeral expenses. The Tribunal's use of a lower multiplier and notional income was erroneous.

Judgment Excerpts

The factual matrix of the appeal is as under: It is stated in the claim petition that on 5.2.2012 when the deceased Sannu Gonda was working as a Compressor Driller under Respondent No.1 in Mahendra Tractor bearing Regn.No.KA-20-N-2883, he met with an accident and sustained severe head injury and died on the spot during the course of employment. Considering the notional income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month, the loss of dependency is calculated as Rs.6,000 x 50% x 217.38 = Rs.6,52,140/-. Adding funeral expenses of Rs.2,500/-, the total compensation is Rs.6,54,640/-.

Procedural History

The appellant filed a claim petition under Sections 8 and 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act before the Senior Civil Judge, Kundapura, which was partly allowed on 18.05.2015. Aggrieved, the appellant filed this appeal under Section 30(1) of the Act before the High Court of Karnataka.

Acts & Sections

  • Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923: Section 4, Section 8, Section 10, Section 30(1), Schedule IV
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Enhances Compensation for Widow of Deceased Workman in Workmen's Compensation Case. Multiplier Method Applied Based on Age and Notional Income Under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Disposes of Appeal as Infructuous in Building Dispute — Retention Wall Already Constructed by Builder. Appeal disposed of in terms of liberty granted by Single Judge as nothing survives for adjudication.