1. Since the claim petitions filed by the respondents herein have been decided by a common award, all these appeals shall stand disposed of by this common order.

2. These appeals, under Section 30 of Workmens Compensation Act, (hereinafter referred to as the `Act) preferred by Divisional Manager State Forest Corporation, Udhampur, are directed against the award dated 31.8.2002 passed by Commissioner Workmens Compensation (Assistant Labour Commissioner) Doda, Camp Ramban, thereby awarding a sum of Rs. 8,13,900/- to the applicants by giving break up of each applicant, inclusive of interest at the rate of 12% effective from the date of institution of claim upto the date of award, in accordance with Section 4(1) (b) of the Act, on the ground of physical disability suffered by them, as assessed by the medical evidence.

3. Facts of the case, in short, may be noticed. Respondents-applicants, namely, Qadir Baksh, Atta Mohammad Bali, Gulzar Begum and Mohd Qasim Bali, presented separate applications in respect of their respective claims under the Workmens Compensation Act before the Commissioner Workmens Compensation (Assistant Labour Commissioner) Doda, each alleging that while in employment under the appellant-non-applicant, they met with an accident on 3.5.1997 in Compartment No. 106 Jungle Katra Nemaie, Udhampur, as a result of which they suffered multiple injuries. It was further stated that during their employment with the appellant-non-applicant a shed fell over them and they sustained serious injuries. The accident occurred in the course of their employment with the appellant-non-applicant. Appellant-non-applicant was put on notice and, while contesting the claims of applicants, the appellant-non-applicant in their reply took the ground of having no knowledge about the employment of the applicants-respondents and expressed their ignorance of applicants having received any injuries during the course of their employment. In support of their claims, the respondents-applicants examined witnesses including the Doctor. The respondents-applicants also appeared as their own witnesses in support of their assertions. The Doctor, after examining the applicants-respondents depicted in detail the injuries suffered by them and the nature of the disability caused to each applicant. The Doctor has further indicated the percentage of disability and the age in case of each applicants-respondents. All the witnesses examined by the respondents-applicants, unanimously and with one voice stated that the applicants were working as Labourers with the appellant-non-applicant and they suffered injuries in an accident on account of collapse of wooden shed while they were in the employment of the State Forest Corporation. No evidence was adduced by the appellant-non-applicant to controvert the evidence of the respondents-applicants.

4. The learned Commissioner, on the basis of record, accepted the case of the respondents-applicants and passed the award on the basis of oral and medical evidence with regard to the percentage of disability assessed in case of each applicant, detailed in the award and after taking into consideration the aspect of relationship of master and servant between the appellant and respondents by giving their age by making reference to section 4 (1) (b) read with Schedule IV of the Act, in his award dated 31.8.2002, which became the subject matter of challenge in these appeals.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record meticulously, I find that the findings recorded by the learned Commissioner are based on appreciation of un-controverted evidence adduced on behalf of the respondents-non-applicants and any prudent man, on perusing the materials on record, will come to such findings. Therefore, there is no scope of interference with such findings of facts in this appeal under section 30 of the Act.

6. That apart, it is pertinent to point out that in appeal, unless a substantial question of law is raised by

Click Here to Read the rest of this document