STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. KANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Misc. Appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') filed by the State against the award passed by Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Jodhpur, in the compensation claim case No. 3-1985 awarding the compensation to the extent of Rs. 67,676 with the cost of Rs. 250.

(2.) THE brief facts giving rise to this civil misc. appeal are that a claim was filed by Smt. Kanta, wife of deceased Amar Singh, on the allegation that deceased Amar Singh was working under Assistant Engineer, Irrigation Survey Sub-Division, Balotra and Executive Engineer, Irrigation Field Investigation Division, Jodhpur. It is alleged that her husband deceased Amar Singh when he was posted at Balotra as a driver in the Field Investigation, was drawing a sum of Rs. 780/one month. The Executive Engineer, Field Investigaton, Jodhpur, by his letter dated 14th December, 1984 directed him to attend the 8th Lok Sabha election along with vehicle No. RSN 1338 to Collector, Jodhpur. In pursuance of this direction the deceased on 14th December 1984 reported to the Collector, Jodhpur with the vehicle. On 17th December 1984 police and her relation informed her that deceased Amar Singh had died during the course of duty and his dead body has been sent for post-mortem to Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Jodhpur. This was also informed by the Collector, Jodhpur to the Executive Engineer, Field Irrigation by his communication dated 21st December, 1984. Hence present claim was filed by deceased's widow under the Workmen's Compensation Act that she may be awarded compensation on account of death of her husband who died in the employment of the respondent and in course of his duties. The claim was contested by the defendant State and they denied that the workman has died in course of his employment. The claim was initially filed for a sum of Rs. 24,000. Thereafter, an amendment application was moved and the amount was increased from Rs. 24,000 to Rs. 67,676 in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The claimant in support of her contention has produced number of witnesses and got the large number of documents exhibited. The non-claimant has also ] examined the witnesses in support thereof and contended that the deceased has not died in course of the employment.

(3.) THE learned Tribunal after hearing both the parties and recording necessary evidence 1 came to the conclusion that the deceased died during the course of the employment of the State. As such, the non-claimants are liable to compensate the deceased's-dependent.