(1.) 2nd Respondent employed the 1st Respondent to work as a coolie in the estate. The 2nd Respondent/employer had obtained insurance coverage from the Appellant for 10 workmen. On 18.10.2005, the 1st Respondent sustained injury by accident arising out of and during the course of his employment. A claim petition was filed against the 2nd Respondent and the Appellant, to pay compensation on account of the permanent disablement suffered and the resultant loss of earning capacity. The claim petition was allowed in part by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation ('CWC' for short) at Chickmagalur, determining the compensation payable to the workman at Rs. 1,06,412/-, out of which, the liability of the employer was determined at Rs. 57,167/- and that of the Appellant at Rs. 49,245/-. The amount was ordered to be deposited within 30 days from the date of order and in case of default, to pay interest at 12% for the delayed period. This appeal by the insurance company is against the order-to deposit compensation of Rs. 49,245/-.
(2.) Sri. A.M. Venkatesh, Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, contended that, the CWC has erred in holding that the Appellant is liable to deposit the compensation of Rs. 49,245/- Learned Counsel submitted that, the loss of earning capacity having been arrived at 30%, the compensation payable would work out to Rs. 29,559/- and hence, modification of the impugned order.
(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd Respondent submitted that, no interference with the impugned order is called for.