LEELA DEVI Vs. SH RAM LAL RAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the "the Act"), is directed against the award dated June 2, 1987, passed by the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, Sadar Sub-Division, District Bilaspuar, Himachal Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as "the Commissioner"), disallowing the claim for compensation lodged by the appellants (widow and daughter of the deceased workman) on the ground that the application for compensation was not maintainable since it was not established that the death had occurred as a result of an accident arising out of and in the course of employment.

(2.) THE case of the appellants before the Commissioner was that the deceased was employed as Watchman in the Cement Factory of the second respondent and that the first respondent, who is a labour contractor, had arranged to provide the services of the deceased to the second respondent. The deceased was assigned fluty on Jan. 31, 1984/ February 1, 1984 between 12 midnight and 8 A. M. It was winter season. No woollen clothing was provided to the deceased nor any heating arrangement was made at the place of his duty despite request. As a result of the bitter cold, the deceased started having pain in the stomach. He was removed to the hospital of the Cement Factory where he breathed his last on Feb. 1, 1984 at 7 A. M. The appellants alleged that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the death of the deceased was attributable to an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment and that, therefore, they were entitled to compensation in accordance with law under the provisions of the Act.

(3.) THE respondents contested the claim on the common ground that the deceased met with his death in natural course and that it had no causal connection with his employment. The second respondent took a specific plea that an inquiry was got conducted into the circumstances leading to the death of the deceased and during the course of such inquiry the aforesaid case set-up by the appellants in the instant proceeding was found to be false.