O.P. OBEROI AND COMPANY Vs. CHARU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the employer under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (Act No. 8 of 1923), (hereinafter called the Act) against the judgment of the Commissioner awarding compensation to the Respondent in a sum of Rs. 2066.40 P. for injuries alleged to have been caused to him by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. The Appellants runs a saw -mill located at Pathankot in the State of Punjab and the Respondent Cheru Ram was employed as a workman in that factory. On 7th of December, 1963, the Respondent who is an unskilled labourer, was deputed to collect sawn pieces of wood from the band -saw. It appears that in order to collect the wood, the Respondent had to cross the belt and what happened was that he tried to remove that belt from the shaft presumably to facilitate the collection of the sawn wood. According to the Respondent, he did so fearing that he might otherwise be involved in an accident. It is common ground that he was trying to remove the belt when he received injuries including a fracture of his right forearm and wounds on the thumb and index finger of the right hand as a result whereof both of them had to be amputated by Doctor Rachhpal Singh, Senior Lecturer Medical College, Amritsar, who appeared as A.W. 1. Loss of earning capacity due to loss of thumb is 30% and due to the loss of 2 phalanxes of the indet finger is 11%. Cheru Ram moved the Commissioner for the said injuries under Section 3 of the Act. The claim of the Respondent was resisted by the Appellant on whose behalf it was pleaded that the Respondent was required to be more than 20 feet from the band -saw and it was no part of his duty to have gone near the belt (patta) gear -box. The accident, according to the Appellant, was the result of sheer negligence of the Respondent who was not at the time performing any duty in connection with the work allotted to him. It was, in other words, pleaded that the accident did not arise out of and in the course of his employment. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:

(2.) WHAT amount, if any, is the Plaintiff entitled to recover by way of compensation from the Respondent ?