PUSPHAM Vs. BONAMER ESTATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under S.30 (a) of the Workmens Compensation Act from an order of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, dismissing Workmen's Compensation Case No. 72 of 1981, which the appellant had filed claiming an amount of Rs. 25,200/- as compensation. In her application the appellant stated that she sustained an injury on 13th of July, 1981, during the course of her employment at about 7.55 a.m. while she was proceeding for work in the Estate Nursery. She stated that her salary was Rs. 318/ per month. The application was dated 24-1-1981. The applicant is admittedly an illiterate. Along with the application she had filed an authorisation authorising the General Secretary of High Range Estate Thozhilali Union to conduct the case en her behalf. The sworn statement was taken from her on 20-10-1981, in which she stated that she was involved in an accident at about 7.45 a.m. on 13-1-1981 while she was proceeding for work in the nursery, that she fell down while she was on her way to work, that her right leg was fractured, and that she was taken to the Estate Hospital, and thereafter to a Private Nursing Home at Mundakkayam. She was treated in that Hospital for about six months. She could not work thereafter. Her claim for compensation was not heeded to by the Management and therefore she was constrained to file the petition.

(2.) In the written objections, the Management denied the accident on 13-7-1981. It was stated that the Management was nut informed of any such accident, that she was not involved in any accident in the course of her employment and that the necessary particulars viz,, time, place and manner of the alleged accident were not disclosed in the application. The applicant filed a replication reiterating that the accident occurred on her way to work and that the time of the accident was about 8.00 a.m. on 13-1-1981. She also reiterated in her statement that the employer arranged for first-aid in the Estate Hospital and thereafter removed her to a Private Nursing Home and that all the expenses for her treatment were met by the Management.

(3.) The applicant was examined as AW-l. She stated in her examination, that the accident occurred on 13-1-1981 while she was going for work in the nursery at about 7.15 a m. According to her, she was proceeding along a short cut, and that consequent on a fall, her right leg was fractured. She stood detailed cross examination fairly well. She stated that her house and the nursery were 21/2 furlongs away and that she would take from 5 to 10 minutes to reach the work spot. She also reasserted that she was proceeding to work along the path road which she usually took eventhough it was possible to go to work along a road constructed by the employer. Another worker, who was examined on the side of the applicant substantially supported her case. After examination of that witness, on 6-4-1982, the applicant filed an application to correct the date of accident of 13-1-1981 instead of 13-7-1981. The employer filed a counter affidavit, objecting to the correction in spite of the fact that the applicant had specifically averred on oath, while examined as a witness that the date of accident was 13-1-1981. There was absolutely no cross examination on that point on behalf of the employer.