KOCHAPPAN Vs. KRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is brought from the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation in W. C. C. No. 10 of 1980 ordering that a sum of Rs. 10,080/- be paid by the appellant to the respondent as compensation for the injury sustained by him in an accident which occurred on 20-3-1977 in the course of his employment under the appellant. The accident occurred while the respondent was climbing a coconut tree in the property of the appellant. He fell down and suffered injuries. He contended that he was an employee in the service of the appellant at the time of the accident. S.3 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 says:

(2.) From the finding of the Commissioner, it is not clear whether or not the employment of the injured under the appellant was of a casual nature, and be was employed for the purposes of the employer's trade or business.

(3.) The employment would not be of a casual nature if there was such regularity or periodicity of employment as to indicate that there was such a degree of mutuality in their obligations as to regard one as the employee and the other as the employer. Was there any obligation, by express or implied contract, to employ the very same person during every season; or was there any statutory obligation to that effect. The question whether the employment was for the purposes of trade or business depends upon the extent of the land, the number of trees, the yield therefrom and other factors. It is a question of fact in each case whether the agricultural operation in which the person was employed was directed towards profit by trade or business or solely for domestic consumption.