ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. ANITA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question which arises in this appeal is, whether there is any causal connection between the death of the deceased workman and his employment? The undisputed facts are that the deceased Sh. Bal Chand was employed as a driver of a Tanker No. MH-05-K7740 with one Sh. Prabhu K. Chandani. According to the owner, this Tanker was being used to spread Tar coal on the road as damper. It appears that to liquefy the tar coal some fire had been lit and the boiler exploded and the tar coal fell on the deceased and he died as a result of the injury sustained.

(2.) The claimants i.e. widow and children of the deceased filed a petition for grant of compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The claim petition was resisted by the Insurance Company mainly on the ground that there was no connection between the employment of the deceased and incident. Sh. Deepak Bhasin, learned Counsel for the Insurance Company has forcefully urged that the onus was on the claimants to show that deceased suffered injuries in question during the course of employment. He submits that in fact the deceased was a driver and the accident did not take place while he was driving the vehicle but took place when he was warming himself near the fire lit up below the boiler of the tanker as is apparent from the reply filed by the owner of the vehicle.

(3.) Section 3 of the Workmen's Compensation Act provides that when a personal injury is caused to the workman by an accident arising out of or in the course of employment, his employer is liable to pay compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The expression 'arising out of and in the course of employment', has been the subject matter of consideration in a large number of cases.