VIMLA DEVI Vs. ASSTT ENG
LAWS(RAJ)-2008-3-105
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on March 11,2008

VIMLA DEVI Appellant
VERSUS
Asstt Eng Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS is appeal by the unfortunate claimants. The circumstances giving rise to the appeal are, that deceased workman Bal Gopal Sharma was employed as Meter Reader with the respondent. The case of the claimants is, that on 21.2.88, while discharging duties as Meter Reader in village Bavalas he died, and therefore, the claim was lodged under Workman Compensation Act, for compensation alongwith interest and penalty. The employer contested the claim, whereupon the learned Commissioner recorded the evidence of the parties. During evidence, the appellant Vimla, the wife of the deceased deposed, that the deceased had gone to village Bavalas for meter reading, during the period 15.2.88 to 21.2.88, she has proved the documents proving the deceased 's discharging the job, and has then deposed, that on 21.2.88, when the deceased was on duty journey, he died. She has also proved the documents about payment of traveling allowance. On the side of the employer one Rajendra Choudhary was examined, who also admitted the deceased to be working as a Meter Reader, and the payment of T.A. bill, meter reading tour program etc. The meter reading binder has also been proved being Ex. 2 to Ex. 18, and bill for traveling on the fateful day has also been duly verified. In these circumstances, it was found, that the deceased was working during course of employment and while so working he died at about 4.30. Thus, it was found that he died in an accident arising out of and during course of employment. Then while deciding this precise issue No. 2, about the deceased having died in an accident arising out of and during course of employment, it was found, that it was not disputed, that on the fateful day, he was on duty at village Bavalas, where he has gone for meter reading, and has died. Thus, the issue was decided in favour of the claimants. Accordingly, consequent upon decision of other issues also, an award of compensation of Rs. 76,856/ -, alongwith penalty, and interest, was passed by the learned Commissioner on 25.2.94.
(2.)AGAINST that award, an appeal was filed by the employer, before the learned Single Judge, which has been allowed by the impugned judgment dated 27.7.99. The learned Single Judge found, that if any personal injury is caused to a workman, by accident, arising out of and during course of his employment, the employer shall be liable. Then the reference made by the employer to the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Machinnon Mackeniie and Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. : (1970)ILLJ16SC was noticed, and it was noticed, that therein it has been held that there must be a causal relationship between the accident and the employment, i.e. if the accident is occurred on account of a risk, which is an incident of the employment, the claim for compensation must succeed, unless of course, the workman has exposed himself to an added peril by his own imprudent act. Then burden of proof was considered, then on those principles, the merits were considered, in the manner, that the deceased died of asphyxia, because of suffocation, due to impaction of foreign body, in his air passage. Then it was considered, that there is no evidence on record, that there was very high pressure of the work on the deceased, so as to be required to work on Sunday, and then postmortem report proves the death, which was not the result of any accident arising out of employment. Noticing this, and other various contentions, it was found, that there is no evidence on record to show, that there was any strain on the mind of the deceased, so as to make a causal connection between the death and the employment. It was found that deceased went to village Bavalas for meter reading, and there is no 4 evidence, that the accident occurred arising out of and during course of employment, and that no causal relationship between the nature of his employment and death has been proved. With this finding, the appeal was allowed, and the award was set aside.
Against that judgment, this appeal has been filed by the claimants, which had been dismissed by the Division Bench, vide order dated 25.8.99. Against that dismissal, the matter was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court, being S.L.P. No. 5169/2000, from out of which, Civil Appeal No. 1616/2000 arose, which was allowed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 3.11.2000, and it was held, that appeal deserves to be heard, and disposed of on merits. With this, Hon'ble Supreme Court refrained from saying anything more, as it might not affect the case of either side. This is how the matter now comes up before us.

(3.)WE have gone through the impugned judgments, so also the record of the learned Commissioner, which is available with us.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.