LALITHAMMA Vs. AGRICULTURAL ENGINEER KARNATAKA AGRO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the appellants. This is an appeal from the judgment and order dated 21-1-1989, delivered by Commissioner of workmen's Compensation and Labour Officer, Hubli, disposing of an application for compensation under Sections 3/4 and 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act.

(2.) RELYING on the statement of Smt. Sarojini, the Tribunal has observed that the appellant, who was applicant 7, in the claim petition, has been the kept mistress of late Shankar Ismailappa and applicant 8, in the claim petition, is the minor son of applicant 7. The two applicants 7 and 8, have come up in appeal, as no compensation has been awarded in applicant 8's favour, nor any share has been given in compensation awarded and the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- only to applicant 7 as compensation.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants, learned Government Pleader and the learned Counsels for the other respondents.