Back
Bombay High Court
NAIK
Mariambai w/o Adam Fakir - Appellant
Versus
Mackinnon Mackenzie - Respondent
Decided On : 10/06/1966
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION - DEATH BY HEAT EXHAUSTION - INJURY BY ACCIDENT ARISING OUT OF AND IN THE COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT - CONDITIONS - SECTION 3(1) OF THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT, 1923.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Adam Fakir, was recruited as a Deck Bhandari on 19th July 1962 at Bombay to serve on the ship S. S. Baluchistan by the opposite party - respondents. Adam Fakir along with other crew, which is called as Asian crew, was taken in a steamer called 'Daressa', which reached Khorramshahr port on 29th July 1962. The Asian crew commenced boarding the ship S.S. Baluchistan at about 3-30 p.m. at Abadan. At 5-35 p.m. the Chief Officer was informed that Adam Fakir the Deck Bhandari, had collapsed in the after accommodation. Adam Fakir was then removed to amidship accommodation. Ambulance was called as Adam Fakir appeared to be in deep coma. It was ascertained that the collapsed man's pulse was extremely high and weak and that his temperature was 104°. Orders were given by the Master that the patient be treated for that heat exhaustion as prescribed by the Ship Captains Medical Guide. At 5-45 p.m. the ambulance arrived and Adam Fakir was removed to Abadan Hospital. Shortly after his arrival he breathed his last, and information was conveyed to the Chief Officer accordingly. The doctor issued a certificate to the effect that Adam Kakir died due to heat exhaustion on 29th July 1962.
Finding of the Court:
The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation held that heat exhaustion which led ultimately to the death of Adam Fakir was an injury by accident which occurred in the course of employment. At the same time, he held that it did not arise out of employment. Consequently, he dismissed the application.
Issues: Whether the heat exhaustion which led to the death of Adam Fakir was an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the heat exhaustion which led to the death of Adam Fakir was not an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. The Court observed that the medical evidence showed that heat exhaustion is due merely to exposure to high temperature and exertion plays no part in bringing about the condition of heat exhaustion. In other words, heat exhaustion is an environmental disease and not a disease due to any special exertion. The Court further observed that the deceased had not yet commenced his duties as a Deck Bhandari and was in the process of joining that part of his duties although technically he had joined his duties. While he was in the proceeding of unpacking his effects he got this attack of heat exhaustion and collapsed. All the circumstances point to the conclusion that heat exhaustion was brought about upon the workman merely by the operation of the forces of nature viz.. adversely severe weather conditions Neither the conditions of duty nor the nature or incident of duty was in anyway responsible for the accident which overcame the workman in the present case.
Final Decision: Appeal dismissed.
2. The opposite party contended that heat exhaustion is a natural cause and is not due to any injury arising out of employment, They relied upon the facts as stated in the Log Book.
3. Appropriate issues were framed and the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation held that heat exhaustion which led ultimately to the death of Adam Fakir was an injury by accident which occurred in the course of employment. At the same time, he held that it did not arise out of employment. Consequently, he dismissed the application. That is why the applicant has now come up in appeal.
4. Mr. Jayakar, for the appellant, contended that Adam Fakir was recruited in Bombay and was taken to Abadan while in the employment of the opposite party. He pointed out that Adam Fakir was taken to Abadan for the purpose of joining his duties as a Deck Bhandari on S.S. Baluchistan. Adam Fakir was taken to a place of extreme heat and was subjected to terrific exposure particularly by reason of the fact that he was picked up from a comparatively cool place and suddenly placed in a locality of high temperature. He, therefore, contended that the finding of the Commissioner that the injury did not arise out of employment is not correct. In support of his argument he relied upon several authorities to which reference would be made hereafter. It may, however, be mentioned that in the course of his reply he made out some new points. He pointed out that post mortem examination was not held over the dead body of the deceased. According to him, it is the normal practice that when a person dies an accidental death or even when a person dies a sudden death, post mortem examination is held. He suggested that the post mortem examination would have revealed whether the deceased was susceptible to extreme heat or variations in temperature. He also pointed out that the opposite party had led no evidence as to the circumstances in which the deceased was taken to Abadan and also the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
