SHA SIVARAJ GOPALJEE Vs. MANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent in Case No.53 of 1954 of the Court of the Commissioner for Workmen 's Compensation,Trivandrum,is the appellant before us.The Commissioner found that the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment of the deceased workman and directed the payment of a sum of Rs.1,800/ - as compensation to his dependents.

(2.) We entertain no doubt that the evidence on record is sufficient to sustain the decision under appeal.The workman was lifting raw tiles and placing them on the heads of the workmen who transport them to the kiln at the time of his death,and the Commissioner is apparently justified in his conclusion that it was the strain of the work that produced the death.As pointed out in AIR 1954 Bombay 180: In order to come within S.3 it is not necessary that it should be established that the workman died as a result of an exceptional strain or some exceptional work that he did on the day in question,

(3.) The words arising out of and in the course of employment have been the subject of a considerable amount of judicial consideration.But as stated by Lord Buckmaster in 1917 AC 249 no authority can with certainty do more than decide whether a particular case upon particular facts is or is not within the meaning of the phrase.And that is exactly what the Commissioner has done.