IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR MFA NO. 105 OF 2018 (MV) BETWEEN SRI. RAJANNA @ KRISHNA S/O LATE SRI SHAMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS OWNER, KRISHNA OIL MILL GANGADHARA NILAYA NEAR SHIVALAYA TEMPLE HULIYAR ROAD ARISIKERE TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT-57310.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. M. BABU - ADVOCATE) AND SRI SHIVANANDA S/O SRI. BALANNA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/O SUBASHNAGAR A.K. COLONY ARSIKERE TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT – 57310.
... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHRIPAD. V. SHASTRI - ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF THE EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.10.2017 PASSED ON ECA NO.9/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, ARSIKERE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,15,812/- WITH INTEREST AT 12% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE REALIZATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal is listed for hearing on interlocutory application. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and award rendered by the Tribunal in ECA No.9/2014 dated 03.10.2017 awarding compensation of Rs.1,15,812/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.
3. The factual matrix of the appeal is as under:
It is stated in claim petition that petitioner was working in the Krishna Oil Mill for about 25 years under the respondent on monthly wages of Rs.6,000/- and batta of Rs.50/-. There was relationship of employer and employee between them. On 11.6.2012 while the petitioner was on duty at 11.30 a.m. when he was fixing the belt to the mill and at that time one Narasimha had put the current switch negligently, without noticing that, the petitioner was fixing the belt and suddenly the machine started and it had cut the right hand thumb, middle finger, ring finger and even the last finger of the petitioner. Immediately, he was taken to Arsikere Government Hospital for treatment and then he was shifted to Holy Cross Hospital, Chikmagalur for greater treatment and he has spent nearly Rs.60,000/- towards medical expenses. He has wife, two children and aged mother and he is the only bread earner of the family and due to the said accident, the same rendered him permanent disability and lost his ability to work and he is unable to carryout his day to day activities. Since, the accident occurred during the course of employment, petitioner filed claim petition against the owner/respondent seeking compensation.
4. Respondent filed objections denying the petition averments and sought for dismissal of the petition. Based upon the pleadings, the Tribunal framed issues. In order to prove the case, petitioner examined himself as PW.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P12. Respondent examined two witnesses as RWs.1 and RW.2 and got marked documents as per Exs.R1 and R2. The Tribunal, after hearing arguments of learned counsel on both sides, passed the impugned judgment, awarding compensation of Rs.1,15,812/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation. It is this judgment which is challenged in this appeal by the owner of the oil mill, by urging various grounds.
5. Learned counsel for the parties have filed a memo for disposal before this Court. They submit that the appeal may be disposed of in terms of the memo. The memo reads as under:
The parties to the appeal have settled the matter and prays that out of the amount deposited in a sum of Rs.1,83,575/- in the above case an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- be ordered to be released in favour of the respondent and the balance amount of Rs.58,575/- to be released in favour of the appellant, in the interest of justice.
The memo is placed on record.
Keeping in view the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the reasons stated in the memo for disposal, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the memo. The matter has been settled between appellant and respondent. Out of the amount deposited in a sum of Rs.1,83,575/- a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- shall be released in favour of claimant/respondent and balance of Rs.58,575/- shall be released in favour of owner/appellant.
However, in view of the submission made by learned counsel for the claimant/respondent, if the claimant is inclined to invest any amount out of Rs.1,25,000/-, which is ordered to be released, a sum of Rs.50,000/- shall be kept in fixed deposit, in the name of the claimant, in any nationalized bank, for a period of three years, in accordance with law.
There shall be no order as to costs. Office is directed to draw the decree, accordingly.
In view of the disposal of the appeal, I.A.3/2018, I.A.4/2018, I.A.5/2018 and I.A.6/2018 does not survive for consideration and are accordingly, rejected.
SD/- JUDGE DKB