(1.) Challenge to this appeal is the award of compensation made in W.C.No.25 of 2007, dated 19.04.2012, on the file of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Coonoor.
(2.) The deceased employee was serving under the third respondent as a painter. During the course of his employment, he fell down from a height and suffered head injuries. There was blood clot in his head and, therefore, he was taken to Medical College Hospital at Calicut and, thereafter, to Ramakrishna Hospital at Coimbatore. Even though the accident had taken place on 29.11.2005, he suffered death on 105.2007. According to the insurance company, the death was not in consequence of the injuries, but it was due to myocardial infraction; and it cannot be said that the death arose out of and during the course of employment and, therefore, the employer is not liable to pay compensation, so also the insurance company.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would vehemently contend that the claimant has let in evidence that the deceased employee was issued with a fitness certificate and was willing to rejoin his duty; there is a clear admission in the cross-examination of the claimant witness that the deceased was suffering from blood pressure and myocardial infraction and, therefore, the authority ought not to have held that the death was caused due to the injuries suffered in the accident, which took place in the year 2005. According to the learned counsel, when a person dies of personal disease, the employer should not be made liable for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act.