D SENTHUR PANDIAN Vs. A MURUGESAN RESPONDENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant is the appellant.

(2.) THE respondent in the appeal filed the suit for damages for Rs. 41,100/- against the defendant on the ground that he suffered serious injuries during his employment due to the defendant's negligence. THE incident took place on 21.11.79. THE respondent had lost his earning capacity on account of the negligence of the appellant, who was his employer who, placed the groundnut bags negligently which fell resulting in the injury THE claim was quantified by taking into account 38 years half wages and the doctor's expenses.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by this, the defendant has filed the present appeal on the ground that the Civil Court ought not to have heard the matter, as its jurisdiction is barred under Section 19(2) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and that once the respondent had elected to go before the Commissioner under the Act, he cannot maintain a suit in view of Section. 3(5) of the Act. The appellant also questioned the quantum decreed by the learned Judge, on the ground it had been fixed arbitrarily and without any material to support the same.