THE MANAGER, TATA TEA LIMITED Vs. KALA SELVAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the employer is against an award of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner. Even going by the employer's version, the workman was injured when a co -worker Chinnappan unknowingly turned round with the pruning machine and the pruning blade used by Chinnappan cut the stomach of the workman before us. The Chief Medical Officer of the employer determined 10% as the disability of the workman. The District Medical Board, Idukki held that the permanent physical disability is 25%. The Commissioner, who had the opportunity to see the workman and had recorded his evidence, fixed the loss of earning capacity as 25%. On that aspect, we do not find any perversity in the appreciation of evidence. No substantial question of law, therefore, arises for decision under that issue.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the appellant points out that though the accident was on 24.3.1999, the application was filed only in 2003. The said delay was explained by affidavit before the Commissioner. Yet, we are inclined to think that the workman having received Rs.22,669.53 from the employer, the application could have been filed earlier. But that by itself does not appear to tilt the scales against a workman in a tea estate, a marginalised citizen, and in favour of the employer. Therefore, we are not inclined to order any deduction in the total compensation or the running of interest on that count; more particularly because no such exercise can be carried out in the absence of any question of law to be answered and found in favour of the employer. On the totality of the facts and circumstances, we do not find that the award is unjust or unreasonable to the employer. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal fails. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.