VALLI Vs. SIDHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the Order of Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Salem, dismissing their Claim Petition for the death of deceased Kunjupaiyan, wife, children and mother of the deceased have filed this Appeal.

(2.) THE case of the Appellants as set out in the Claim Petition is as follows:- THE Appellants are the Dependants and Legal Heirs of the deceased Kunjupaiyan. THE Respondents 1 to 5 are the owners of the well situated in S.No.602/2 of Elampillai Village. On 18.03.1996, the 5th Respondent approached Kunjupaiyan to retrieve the wooden plank ("Thoranapalagai"), which has fallen in the well. Kunjupaiyan was offered a sum of Rs.30/- for the said work. Kunjupaiyan in order to retrieve the wooden on 18.03.1996 at 11.00 a.m. dived into the well. Accidentally, he got struck in a cave situated inside the well and died. Stating that the accident occurred during the course of employment under the Respondents, Claimants have filed Petition U/s. 3 and 4 of Workmen's Compensation Act, claiming compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-.

(3.) BEFORE the Deputy Commissioner, First Claimant examined herself as P.W.1. Brother of the deceased was examined as P.W.2. Exs. P.1 to P.4 were marked. On the side of Respondents, 5th Respondent was examined as R.W.1. Upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence, Tribunal held that the deceased Kunjupaiyan is not a "Workman" within the meaning of Section 2 (1)(n) of Workmen's Compensation Act. The Deputy Commissioner has further held that the alleged employment, viz., to lift the wooden plank would not fall within the purview of Items (xxxix), (xl), (xli) of the Schedule II. Holding that the deceased was not a "Workman" within the meaning of Section 2(1)(n), the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, dismissed the Claim Petition.