( 1 ) THIS appeal is by the insurer. According to Mr. Seetharama Rao, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the following substantial questions of law arise for consideration: (1) Whether the Commissioner had jurisdiction to entertain the claim when the death of Shivanna had not been caused due to an accident which had occurred during the course and out of the employment? (2) Whether the Commissioner was justified in supplanting the word accident to entertain the claim petition when the petition itself had mentioned it as an incident? (3) Whether Commissioner was justified in ignoring the contents of the F. I. R. and mahazar which had clearly shown that cause of death was not an accident and it was a suicide?

( 2 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by the Workmen's compensation Commissioner, Davangere in Case No. WCA. CR. 141 of 2000 dated 30. 3. 2002. In this appeal, Mr. See- tharama Rao, the learned counsel for the appellant has raised various interesting points and a multi-corner attack is also made against the claim of compensation. The appeal was heard at great length. Since various important points are raised and with a vie