C.R. BHANUMATHI, SHRI. D.L. SRINIVAS AND SMT. LAKKAMMA Vs. SHRI. K.T. SHRISHYALA SHRI. JAYA PADMA MOTER SERVICE AND THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED advocates appearing for the parties would fairly submit that though matter has been admitted on 01.03.2010 after hearing the learned advocates, substantial question of law as required under section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 has not been formulated and as such they request this court to formulate the same and adjudicate it on the basis of the material evidence available on record and contention raised by them. It is the contention of Sri. M.V. Hiremath, learned counsel for the appellants that Commissioner for Workmen Compensation was not justified in construing the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- though it was specifically contended that deceased was getting a salary of Rs. 4,000/- per month and Rs. 50/- as batta per day in all it would be Rs. 5,500/- and as such he seeks for construing the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,500/- and awarding of compensation accordingly by formulating the substantial question of law as formulated in the appeal memorandum.

(2.) PER contra, Sri. Abhinandan, learned counsel appearing for Sri. A.N. Krishnaswamy for respondent No. 2 would support the order and award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation and contends that the very fact that cause of death of the workman was itself in dispute and as such cross objection had been filed and as such question of enhancing compensation in the absence of any material evidence is not called for Hence, he prays for answering the substantial question of law in favour of the insurer and prays for dismissal of the appeal.

(3.) PERUSAL of the records secured from the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation would indicate that deceased Sri. D.N. Lakshmana was working as a Conductor in the bus belonging to first respondent. On account of rash and negligent driving of driver of the bus he fell down inside the moving bus and due to shock he expired. As such his wife, son and mother filed a claim petition seeking compensation.