NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. FATMABAI BHURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 against the order dated 25-10-1975 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Indore, awarding compensation in favour of the claimant-respondents Nos. I, 2 and 3.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:-The claimant-respondents Nos. I, 2 and 3 submitted an application under section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 23-2-1973 for award of compensation before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Indore, on the allegations that Bhura was husband of Smt. Fatmabai-claimant No. I and father of Saleem and raisa-claimants No. 2 and 3. Bhura was a workman employed as operator of Driller-Tractor No. RJQ 5735 by Jamnalal. On 14-11-1972, Bhura received personal injury by accident ar sing out and in the course of his employment. The injury so sustained by him resulted in death of Bhura on the spot. The cause of this injury was that Bhura was travelling from Bhilwara to burhanpur with the said Driller-Tractor as an operator as directed by jamnalal. At that time, Bhura was incharge of the Driller-Tractor which was loaded on a truck bearing registration No. RSL 4263 belonging to one smt. Gurcharan Kaur of Bhilwara. While so proceeding, the truck overturned on the road and while nearing Mhow in the District of Indore, M. P. and as a result thereof Bhura died on the spot. It was further averred that the applicants are dependents of the deceased workman Bhura who was employed on monthly wages of Rs. 350 and his age at the time of death Was over the age of 15 years. Notice of the accident was served on 22-1-1973. On these facts, a compensation in an amount of Rs. 9,000 was claimed under section 4 read with Schedule 4 of the Act. The New India Assurance company-appellant herein was impleaded, being insurer of the said tractor and the truck.

(3.) THE claim was resisted by Jamnalal inter alia on the grounds that bhura was not employed by him as operator on his tractor; that Bhura before his death some times used to come as a casual worker and was paid rs. 5 per day whenever he worked with him. Accordingly, Bhura was neither a workman nor an employee; that the tractor was to be sent to his camp at Nanded beyond Burhanpur, Bhura was directed to reach Burhanpur by Railway and not asked to go by the said tractor, and that the claimants are not entitled to award of any compensation.