Payment of compensation for death in course of employment.

T. Somasundaram, J.

1. This is an appeal preferred by the management of Devon Estate, Devarshola Post, Nilgiris District against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore, dated 29.7.1982 in W.C. Case No. 9 of 1982 awarding compensation of a sum of Rs. 18,000/- in favour of the first respondent herein. W.C. Case No. 9 of 1982 is an application filed by the first respondent herein claiming a compensation of Rs. 18,000/-for the death of her husband Mohamed while he was working under the appellant herein on 9.6.1981.

2. The case of the first respondent in W.C. Case No. 9 of 1982 is as follows: The husband of the first respondent, Mohamed, a workman employed by the appellant herein on 9.6.1981 received personal injuries in an accident arising out of and during the course of his employment resulting in his death on 9.6.1981. The cause of the injury was that on 9.6.1981 the late Mohamed, during the course of his employment while working, suffered acute chest pain as a result of which he died instantaneously in the hospital at 8.45 a.m. The respondent is the dependant of the deceased worker being his wife and that she is entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 18,000/- as compensation.

3. The appellant herein resisted the claim for compensation contending as follows: The late Mohamed did not die on 9.6.1981 as a result of an injury caused out of and in the course of employment under the appellant. On the other hand, the deceased workman even before he commenced work for the day complained of chest pain due to heart attack and died at the hospital at about 8.10 a.m. There was no accident and the death of Mohamed was due to natural causes and it was not due to injury and it did not occur in the work spot and in the course of his employment and, therefore, the appellant is not liable to pay any compensation. During the enquiry before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore two witnesses were examined on behalf of the first respondent herein. The specific evidence of one Putturangan, who was examined as AW 2 in this case, is that on the date of accident at about 7.30 a.m., when the deceased Mohamed was cutting the grass he collapsed. Thereafter, he was taken to the hospital where he died. Three witnesses were examined on behalf of the appellant herein. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore accepted the evidence of AW 2 and disbelieved the evidence of RWs 1 to 3 and held that the deceased was a workman under the appellant and that the accident arose in the course of and out of employment and, therefore, the appellant is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 18,000/- as compensation to the first respondent

4. Aggrieved by the said order of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore, the present civil miscellaneous appeal is filed.

5. There is no dispute in this case that the deceased Mohamed was a workman under the appellant. Mr. T.S. Gopalan, learned counsel for the appellant, contended that the workman Mohamed died of heart attack and that the first respondent failed to establish that the workman Mohamed died in the course of and out of employment and that the first respondent failed to establish the causal connection between the work and the injury and, therefore, the appellant is not liable to pay compensation. In support of his contention learned counsel relied on the decisions in Laxmibai v. Port Thist, Bombay (1954) 1 LLJ 614; Kamla Bai v. Divisional Superintendent Central Railway 1971 ACJ 170 (Bombay) and Sarat Chatterjee & Co. v. Khairunnessa 1967 ACJ 290 (Calcutta). The contention of the learned counsel is without substance. The oral evidence let in on behalf of the first respondent herein discloses that on 9.6.1981 the deceased Mohamed during the course of his employment in the working hours, while he was going to the field from the muster, suffered from acute chest pain and as a result of which he died instantaneously at the hospital at 8.45 a.m. Under these circumstances in view of the evidence of AWs it has