SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER Vs. PANDIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made in this appeal, to the award of Rs.3,05,922/-, dated 20.01.2003 and made in W.C.No.316 of 2001, on the file of the learned Deputy Commissioner of Labour for Workmen Compensation, Madurai, by the respondent in the claim petition.

(2.) THE facts which are absolutely necessary for the disposal of this appeal may be summarized as under:

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant while advancing his argument has submitted that the deceased cannot be characterised and brought within the ambit to Section 2(n) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 to define him as a workman. Secondly, he has also submitted that the appellant board being the principal employer is not liable to pay any compensation, under the provision of the Act to the respondent. Thirdly, he has also submitted that the finding of the learned Deputy Commissioner of Labour for Workmen Compensation, Madurai that the death arose out of and during the course of employment of the appellant board is not sustainable under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.