BALU RAMA PATIL Vs. RAMESH SHANKAR RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of both the parties, the same is taken up for final hearing.

(2.) THIS appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The claim application filed by the applicant was rejected by the Workmen's Compensation commissioner holding that the injured driver of the car is not entitled for compensation as he does not fall within the definition of the term 'workman' as defined under Section 2 (1) (n) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act' ).

(3.) BRIEF facts which are essential for the disposal of the case are as under: that the appellant who was working as a driver of the Ambassador Car bearing registration No. GA-01-A-5762, belonging to respondent 1 met with an accident on June 29, 1999. It is contended that while he was driving the said vehicle, it dashed against a truck bearing Registration No. KA 22-A-28. He further contended that the accident occurred while he was returning from Goa to Belgaum near Macchie Bus Stand. Alleging that he sustained compound fracture and other injuries, the claimant preferred a claim petition before the Workmen's Compensation commissioner at Belgaum.