IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18Th DAY OF NOVErv1BER, 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AN. VENUGOPALA GOWDA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APP EAL20408201NC) BETWEEN: Sri Fakkirappa S/o Yamanappa Kuri Age: 31 years, 0cc: Coolie now nit R/o Toranagatti, Tq, Ramdurga, Dist: Beigaum. APPELLANT (By Sri. Hanamant R. Latur, Adv,) 1. The Section Officer, HESCOM, Katakol, Tq. Rarndurga, Dist: Belgaum. 2. The Executive Engineer, (Electric) 0 and M Division, HESCOM, K.LE. Road, Belgaum. 3. Assistant Executive Engineer, (Electric) 0 and M Division, HESCOM, Katakol, 2 This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 30(1) of the W.C.Act, 1923, against the judgment and order dated 31.08.2010 passed in W.C.A./SR. No.113/2009 on the file of the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Sub-Division II, Belgaum, seeking enhancement of compensation. This appeal coming on for admission this day, the Court delivered the following: - JUDGMENT Though the appeal iè listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel appearing on both sides, the matter is heard for final disposal. 2. Claim petition filed by the appellant against the respondents under the provisions of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 was allowed in part and compensation of Rs.408,744/- with interest was ordered to be paid. Award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation against the respondents has not been questioned by the respondents. This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of the tar amount. —A 3 3. Sri H.R. Latur, learned advocate appearing for the appellant contended that, the Commissioner erred In reckoning the wages of the appellant at Rs.3,500/- p.m. as against Rs.6,000/- p.m. and also In not awarding interest at 12% p.a. on the determined compensation amount after 30 days of occurrence of the accident. 4. Sri M.B. Kanavi, learned advocate appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, contended that, the Commissioner has correctly appreciated the evidence on record and the wages reckoned at Rs..3,500/- p.m. is justified. Learned counsel contended that, the award of pendente Iite interest at 7.5% p.a. is in consonance with the decision of the Apex Court In the case of ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MOHD. NASIR AND ANOTHER REPORTED IN AIR 2009 SCW3717. 5. I have perused the record. In view of the rival contentions, the questions for determination are: eN 4 (I) Whether the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation is justified in reckoning the wages ofthe appellant at Rs.3500/- per month? fjj) Whether the appellant is entitled to interest at 12% p.a. on the compensation amount with effect from 18.06.2009? Re: Point No.(fl: 6. Appellant deposed before the Commissioner. Exs.P8 to P16 were marked. Dr. Ramesh Patagundi was examined as PW-2. Appellant though stated that he was earning wages of Rs.200/- per day, did not produce any credible evidence. Appellant did not even examine a co worker In support of the wages paid. The appreciation of evidence by the Commissioner is neither perverse nor iliegai. In the absence of any credibie material placed on record, taking into consideration the fact that, the appellant was only a cooiie doing digging work, Commissioner is Justified in determining the wages earned by the appeiiant at Rs.3,500/- p.m. Learned Commissioner by noticing the age of the appellant, has applied the relevant factor and rightly determined the compensation payable at Rs.4,08,744/-. Re: point No.(il): 7. The appellant has suffered employment injury. The liability to pay compensation by the employer to the workman under the provisions of the Act arises on the date the accident occurs. Within 30 days, the compensation ought to have been deposited before the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation. The compensation having not been deposited, the liability to pay compensation having not been disputed and even the approximate compensation was neither paid nor deposited, in my opinion, the ratio of the decision in the case reported in ILR 2009 KAR 1422 squarely applies. Following the ratio of the said decision, the impugned Award calls for modification i.e., in so far as the date and the rate of interest payable on the compensation amount is concerned. 6 In the result, appeal is allowed in part. The impugned award Is modified. The compensation amount of Rs.4,08,744/- shall carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 18.06.2009 till the date of deposit by the respondents before the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation. Draw the modified award. Sd! JUDGE sac*