Case Note & Summary
The appeal was filed by the Oriental Insurance Company under Section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, against the order dated 19th June 2006 passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Sub Division-3, Bannerghatta Road, Karmika Bhavan, Bangalore, in CWC-3/NFC/CR-43/02. The Commissioner had awarded compensation of Rs. 3,81,222/- with interest at 12% per annum from 21/06/2002 till deposit in favour of the injured claimant, Ravi, who had claimed Rs. 6,00,000/-. The Insurance Company sought reduction of compensation on the ground that the award was highly exorbitant and excessive. The claimant, Ravi, was a workman employed by M/s. Friendly Transport, and he suffered injuries in an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. The Commissioner assessed the loss of earning capacity at 100% despite medical evidence indicating only 26% disability. The Insurance Company raised substantial questions of law: whether the Commissioner was justified in taking 100% loss of earning capacity contrary to medical evidence, and whether the Commissioner is competent to ignore medical evidence. The court, after hearing the parties, held that the Commissioner erred in taking 100% loss of earning capacity when medical evidence showed only 26% disability. The court relied on the Full Bench decision in Shivalinga Shivanagowda Patil & others Vs. Erappa Basappa Bhavihala & others, ILR 2004 KAR 193, which held that the Commissioner must assess loss of earning capacity based on medical evidence and cannot ignore it. The court modified the award, reducing the compensation by recalculating based on 26% disability. The appeal was partly allowed, and the compensation was reduced accordingly.
Headnote
A) Workmen's Compensation - Loss of Earning Capacity - Assessment - Section 4(1)(c) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - The Commissioner must assess loss of earning capacity based on medical evidence and cannot arbitrarily fix it at 100% ignoring medical opinion. The court held that the Commissioner erred in taking 100% loss of earning capacity when medical evidence showed only 26% disability. (Paras 3-5) B) Workmen's Compensation - Medical Evidence - Binding Nature - The Commissioner is not competent to ignore medical evidence and arrive at a conclusion of own to assess loss of earning capacity. The court relied on the Full Bench decision in Shivalinga Shivanagowda Patil & others Vs. Erappa Basappa Bhavihala & others, ILR 2004 KAR 193. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation was justified in taking the loss of earning capacity at 100% contrary to medical evidence indicating 26% disability, and whether the Commissioner is competent to ignore medical evidence.
Final Decision
Appeal partly allowed. The award of the Commissioner is modified. The loss of earning capacity is taken at 26% instead of 100%, and compensation is recalculated accordingly. The amount already deposited may be adjusted.
Law Points
- Workmen's Compensation Act
- 1923
- Section 4(1)(c)
- loss of earning capacity
- medical evidence
- disability assessment
- substantial question of law
