CHAIN RAM Vs. SHAMBHU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present civil miscellaneous appeal under Sec. 30 of the Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 has been filed by appellants being aggrieved against the award dtd. 31/5/2011 passed by the learned Workmens Compensation Commissioner, Udaipur in Claim Case No.W.C./F.(D.)-43/2010 "Chain Ram & Anr., v. Shambhu Singh & Anr." whereby the claim of the appellants was dismissed on the ground that the appellants could not prove the existence of employee-employer relationship between the deceased - Onkar Gayari with the owner/employer - Shambhu Singh.

(2.) Facts of the case in brief are that a claim was filed by the claimant while asserting that the deceased - Onkar Gayari (son of claimants) was working under the employment of respondent No.1-Shambhu Singh as a Khalasi in the truck in question and was earning Rs.6,000.00 per month. It was further emphasized that the accident occurred during the course of employment and the deceased expired due to the accident of the truck in question. A reply to the claim was filed by the owner - Shambhu Singh who admitted the factum of ownership in Para Nos. 1 and 2 of his reply, however, denied the receipt of salary to the tune of Rs.6000.00 and stated that the salary being paid was Rs.1,500.00 per month. The Insurance Company on the other hand denied the factum of existence of employee-employer relationship as well as all other facts. The learned Commissioner thereafter framed 5 issues for adjudication which are as under:-

(3.) In order to prove their case, the claimant Chain Ram (appellant No.1) examined himself as AW-1 and he was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the respondent. An affidavit of Taku Bai was also filed, however, she did not appear in the cross-examination and therefore the affidavit was not considered.