K.J. Joseph, J.

1. The petitioner was an employee in the saw mill owned by the first respondent. On 6-5-1987, in the course of employment, he sustained injuries, as a result of which his right palm was cut off. Though it was got stitched, the five fingers of his right hand became paralysed. He, therefore, filed a claim petition before the third respondent under the Workman's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short, the Act only). The third respondent, as per Ext. P1 judgment awarded a compensation of Rs. 24,460/- with 6% interest per annum from 6-6-1987 and in case of failure to deposit the said amount in the court within 30 days from the date of receipt of intimation of the said judgment, revenue recovery steps were directed to be taken against the first respondent under S.31 of the Act. Instead of complying with Ext. P1, he chose to execute two settlement deeds - Exts. P2 and P3 - in favour of his wife viz. the second respondent transferring the entire properties owned by him. According to the petitioner, Exts. P2 and P3 were executed only to defeat the claim of the petitioner under Ext. P1. Thereafter, the second respondent filed O.S.No. 1033 of 1991 before the Principal Munsif