SAMPURAN SINGH Vs. MUKHTIAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal has been filed by the employer Sampuran Singh against order dated December 13, 1978, passed by the Commissioner Ludhiana, under the Workmen's Compensation Act granting compensation of Rs. 12,600/- to Mukhtiar Singh, the workman, for the injuries suffered by him in the course of employment while working on a thrasher.

(2.) The workman claimed compensation on an application filed under section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter called 'the Act'). He was employed with Sampuran Singh and getting Rs. 160/- per mensum as wages plus meals worth Rs. 50/-. On May 2, 1976 at about 9.30 a.m. when he was engaged for thrashing the wheat of the employers his right hand was involved in the thrasher resulting in chopping off all the four fingers and the thumb. He was admitted to the hospital and the injuries suffered were to the extent of 50% disability. After notice was served the claim was filed. Though initially lesser amount was claimed, however, he got the claim application amended and claimed Rs. 12,600/-. The employer contested the claim, inter alia, alleging that the Workmen's Compensation (Amendment) Act, 1976, was not applicable to the case in hand as it was enacted on May 21, 1916, whereas the alleged accident had taken place earlier. The workman was only entitled to (sic). It was denied that the workman was employed with him. Payment of wages was also denied. The accident took place due to the negligence of the workman himself while he was thrashing his own wheat by means of a thrasher belonging to one Kashmira Singh.

(3.) It has been argued by learned counsel for the appellant-employer that Mukhtiar Singh was not working as employee but was working on thrasher for thrashing his own wheat and that too on a thrasher of Kashmira Singh. The Commissioner was wrong in holding to the contrary that the workman was employee of Sampuran Singh. I do not find any merit in this contention. AW.2 Sajjan Singh stated that Mukhtiar Singh was employed as workman by Sampuran Singh for doing the work in his farm. The wages fixed were Rs. 160/- per month with meals. On May 2, 1976 at about 9.30 a.m. when Mukhtiar Singh was thrashing the wheat his right hand fingers were cut. He was present on the spot at that time. Sampuran Singh was also present there. Mukhtiar Singh workman also appeared as AW-1 and deposed that he was employed by Sampuran Singh at Rs. 160/- per month with meals. The expenditure on meals was assessed at Rs. 50/- per month. On the day of accident he was thrashing wheat on the transfer being run by the tractor of Sampuran Singh. He was putting the wheat stacks into the thrasher. When he was giving the rugg into the transfer it stopped, then he tried to press the rugg into the thrasher as a result of which his right hand got entangled. His fingers and thumb were chopped off. General cross-examination was conducted that practice in the village was that agricultural labour used to be employed and labour was paid in kind and, thereafter, those labourers used to thrash the own wheat of their share. Such cross-examination is not helpful to the employer. The witness could not give the names of other labourers who were helping him in thrashing the wheat. From such cross-examination it cannot be said that the employer had succeeded in establishing that the workman was not employed with him. AW-2 Sajjan Singh deposed that Mukhtiar Singh was working with Sampuran Singh in the field thrasher when the accident took place. He was grazing his buffaloes in the nearby field. Sampuran Singh who was present there stopped the thrasher after the accident. During cross-examination it was brought out that he and Mukhtiar Singh belonged to one community. But on that ground alone his statement cannot be brushed aside. His presence on the spot cannot be doubted. He has during cross-examination stated about the presence of other work of Sampuran Singh. On the other hand Sampuran Singh appeared as RW-1 and denied having employed Mukhtiar Singh. According to him Mukhtiar Singh was working on daily-wages and was not on annual basis. He admitted that fingers of the workman were chopped off when he was thrashing wheat. However, he stated that the wheat belonged to the workman and the tractor was owned by Kashmira Singh of village Jalanpur. During cross-examination he admitted that he took the injured workman to the Civil Hospital, Khanna. He also admitted that the fingers of the workman were chopped off in the accident aforesaid. He further admitted that notice was served upon him. Village Jalanpur was stated to be 9 or 10 miles from Village Rohno Khurd where the accident took place. Kashmira Singh RW 2 was produced to support him. He stated having gone to village Rohno Khurd with his tractor for thrashing the wheat of one Hari Singh. The tractor was given by him on hire basis. However, according to him the workman was thrashing his own wheat with his tractor. He is an ex-serviceman like the employer. He did not issue any receipt for the charges of his tractor. During cross-examination he could not give the exact date on which he had given his tractor to Mukhtiar Singh on hire. RW-3 is Hari Singh who stated that Mukhtiar Singh was working on daily wages. He never worked with anybody on monthly or annual basis. Evidence of Kashmira Singh and Hari Singh has not inspired confidence, to be relied upon. The negative evidence of Hari Singh is not at all helpful to the employer. Kashmira Singh who is an ex-serviceman and whose village is far away-about 10 miles, was not expected to lend his tractor to a casual workman in village Rohno Khurd. The workman's evidence was rightly accepted by the Commissioner in coming to the conclusion that he was working with the employer Sampuran Singh at the relevant time and thrashing his wheat with the working of the tractor and that the wheat belonged to Sampuran Singh.