ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BHADRAVATHI Vs. H S SUNANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) this is an appeal presented by the "employer" under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'act').

(2.) the facts of the case in brief are as follows: the deceased krishna while working at bhadra river left bank canal slipped into the canal and died on 4-3-1992. Respondent No. 1 is the wife of the deceased ad respondent No. 2 is the mother of the deceased. They presented the claim petition before the commissioner, who by his Order, dated 6-9-1993 has awarded a sum of Rs. 68,977-00 with simple interest at 6% from 4-3-1992 till the date of deposit.

(3.) Sri H.J. Sunder kumar, learned high court government Advocate submitted that the deceased was not a "workman" as defined in the act. Section 2(l)(n) defined "workman" as follows: "workman" means any person (other than a person whose employment is of a casual nature and who is employed otherwise than for the purposes of the employer's trade or business) who is