MAHADEO NIVRUTI CHIVATE Vs. SULOCHANA VASANT PAWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Advocates for the appellant and the respondents. The respondents had filed a claim petition for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The respondents are the legal representatives pi deceased Vasant Maruti Pawar who died in an accident on 15th November, 1988 at Savalaj while he was doing the work of the appellant. The appellant, at that relevant time, was constructing a building in his firm. Deceased Vasant was employed for plastering the said building and while he was doing the said work he fell on the ground and sustained grievous injuries and died.

(2.) THE Counsel for the appellant contended the deceased Vasant did not come under the definition of workman as given in the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as "The Act") because his employment was of a casual nature and deceased Vasant was not employed (or the purposes of trade or business of the appellant, because the appellant was doth merchant.

(3.) IN the second judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court, it has been held that, since the height of a building could be found out by measurement by any person, the burden is on the applicant for compensation to show that the building was above the prescribed height. I have no hesitation to follow this judgment because, as rightly observed, the height of the building could be measured by anybody and H could not be said that it was the matter within the special knowledge of the employer.