P. Swaroop Reddy, J.

This appeal came up for hearing on a reference made by a learned single Judge of this Court.

2. The question involved is whether a workman that suffered injuries during the course of employment and became disabled is entitled for compensation on the basis of 100% disablement, in spite of his not suffering injuries, as mentioned in Schedule I of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, as section 2 (1)(l) of the Act provides for the same, but the proviso to the above section contemplates that permanent disablement shall be deemed to result from the injuries specified in Part-I of Schedule I or from any combination of injuries specified in Part-II of Schedule-I.

3. As there are conflicting decisions on this question, the learned Single Judge referred this question to the Division Bench.

4. Necessary facts are as follows: The workman was a driver on lorry bearing registration No.AHJ-8897 on a salary of Rs.2,000-00 per month, apart from batta of Rs.50-00 per day. On19.2.1997, while he was driving that lorry from Huzurnagar to Visakhapatnam, the lorry met with an accident near Gogulapadu in Visakhapatnam District; as the lorry driven by the workman