( 1 ) THIS appeal is filed by an injured workman who as a result of the decision given by the learned Commissioner for Workmens Compensation has become an employee without there being an employer. Such is the astounding result brought about by the learned Commissioner by taking hyper-technical view and by following the strict principles of rules of pleadings and Evidence Act which are not applicable to the cases under Workmens Compensation Act 1923

( 2 ) THE learned Commissioner for Workmens Compensation Bharuch (the learned Civil Judge Senior Division who is ex-officio Commissioner) has rejected the application of the injured workman for compensation solely on the ground that there was no sufficient proof to show that the workman was employed either by respondent No. 1 truck owner or respondent No. 3 quarry owner. On 6/01/1983 when the workman was engaged in lifting the stones from the quarry belonging to respondent No. 3 and filling the stones in the truck belonging to respondent No. 1 a stone accidentally fell on his hand. As a result of this accident he received injury on his left hand index finger. Two phalanges of left index finger had been crushed. Ultimately