LAKSHMI Vs. PROPRIETOR HOTEL AJANTHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is by the claimant who filed application claiming compensation before the commissioner for workmen's compensation for the death of her husband, one narasimha.

(2.) THE facts in this case are, that the husband of the appellant, narasimha was working in the respondent's hotel. On 17. 4. 1985, when he was sleeping in the hotel, he was killed by a co-worker, one nagaraja at about 1 a. m. in the night. In this regard, a first information report was also given to the jurisdictional police. Thereafter, the appellant-claimant filed an application claiming compensation. The said application was rejected by the commissioner in the first instance. The said order was set aside by this court in the miscellaneous first appeal and remanded the matter for fresh enquiry to the commissioner. Again, after remand, the commissioner dismissed the application filed by the appellant on two grounds. Firstly, he has held that the deceased narasimha was not a workman. Secondly, the claimant is not entitled to claim any compensation since, the death of narasimha falls outside the course of the employment. This order is under challenge by the appellant in this appeal.

(3.) MR. S. n. bhat, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the commissioner was not right in holding that the deceased narasimha was not a workman when the respondent himself admits that he is an employee of the respondent. There is some substance in this contention. The Supreme Court has held in several cases that the hotel is an industry. If that is so, since the deceased narasimha was admittedly an employee working in the respondent hotel, i hold that he is a workman as defined under the act.