RAMA KRISHNA Vs. MARAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation by calling in question the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Mandya.

(2.) Heard both sides in respect of the application filed to condone the delay and the delay is condoned as sufficient cause is show, As far as the merits of the appeal is concerned, the learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the loss of earning capacity percentage taken by the Commissioner at 45% is on the lower side and it ought to have been taken at 60%.

(3.) The submission of the learned Counsel for respondent 2-Insurance Company is that the order of the Commissioner requires no modification because the claimant, being the conductor-cum-cleaner, had only sustained fracture of the left forearm and, therefore, the said injury cannot lead to 60% loss of earning capacity.