M SUVARNA Vs. FACTORY MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Claimants in CR-33/2007 on the file of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Bangalore, have come up in this appeal challenging the order dated 29.1.2008 rejecting their Claim Petition.

(2.) Brief facts leading to this appeal are as under:

(3.) In the said proceedings, Respondents entered appearance through counsel, filed statement of objection accepting deceased S. Narayanaswamy as employee of first Respondent-Company. They objected to fourth claimant joining others in the said petition as she was already married and not being dependent of deceased, as such was not entitled to seek any compensation. They also took up a contention that on 8.5.2002 deceased was assigned work in PPI Department, whereas accident has taken place in administrative block of first Respondent-Factory, where deceased had no business to go. Even otherwise if he has to go to the said building he will have to take necessary pass. The said building is about 300 meter away from the place where deceased was assigned to carry out the work at the relevant point of time and since S. Narayanaswamy was not given any work which requires his presence in administrative block, there is no nexus between the work assigned arid his presence in the place of accident. It was also contended that the deceased was alcoholic, he was defaulter in repayment of loan taken for purchase of two-wheeler, he had suffered punishment for default in repayment of the same. Further on the ill-fated day, the deceased had no business to go near the administrative block. That the said person had gone to administrative block without any specific work, for the sole purpose of committing suicide. His fall from the third floor is not an accidental fail, it was a deliberate fall with an intention to commit suicide.