IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ REVIEW PETITON NO.65/2017 BETWEEN:
1. The General Manager, South Western Railway, Head Quarters Office, Hubballi, Karnataka.
2. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Bengaluru Division, South Western Railway, Bengaluru. ... PETITIONERS (By Sri Abhinay Y.T., Advocate) AND:
1. N. Malar W/o C. Muniswamy, Aged about 40 years, 2. Sugumar S/o late C. Muniswamy, Aged about 27 years, 3. M. Prathiban S/o late C.Muniswamy, Aged about 24 years, And all are residing at Yadamangalam PO (via) Pandur, Pochampalli Taluk, Krishnagiri District, Tamilnadu. ... RESPONDENTS This Review Petition is filed under Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC, praying to review the order dated 08.06.2016 passed in M.F.A. No.1092/2013 (WC), on the file of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru.
This Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T This review petition has been filed to review the order dated 08.06.2016 passed by this Court in M.F.A.No.1092/2013 and further seeking to dismiss the order dated 16.08.2012 passed in W.C.A.No.31/2007.
2. The Labour Officer and the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Mandya Sub-Division – I, Mandya, awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,32,580/- with interest at 12% p.a. for the death of one Sri.C.Muniswamy, who was working as a Pointsman/Gateman i.e., Group-D employee under the petitioners. Against the said award, the petitioners herein filed M.F.A.No.1092/2013. This Court by its order dated 08.06.2016 dismissed the said appeal.
3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that it is a case of suicide and not an accident. Therefore, the claimants were not entitled for any compensation.
4. This Court while passing the Judgment has observed that the opinion of the Doctor is only his personal view but not fact. On the basis of presumption and assumption, the Court cannot pass orders. The Employees Compensation Act is a social peace of Legislation with an intention to help the victim of the accident. In the absence of any materials regarding suicide, it has to be held that the deceased had fallen down on the track and died due to the accident.
5. I do not see any justifiable ground to take a different view than what has been taken by this Court while passing the order in M.F.A.No.1092/2013. There is no error apparent on the face of record. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as devoid of merits.
6. In view of dismissal of the review petition, I.A.No.1/2017 does not survive for consideration. Hence, the same is also dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE KTY