PIRBHAI KHANBHAI MANSURI Vs. DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr. M.H. Rathod for the appellants and learned advocate Mr. G.M. Joshi for the respondents No.1 and 2. Perused the record.

(2.) The appellants herein have preferred an application being W.C. Application No.46 of 2005 before the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, claiming Rs. 3,42,432/- with 50% penalty and interest from the employer.

(3.) After allowing both the parties to adduce the evidence and after considering the rival submissions and evidence, by impugned judgment and award dated 6.2013, the Commissioner has rejected the application of the victim, solely on the ground that it cannot be said that victim has received injuries during the course of his employment. Because of such conclusion, the Commissioner has failed to scrutinize the amount of compensation that may be awarded to the victim.