Merely on basis of pleadings in claim petition Commissioner cannot conclud that there is link between death and employment.

One Periyasamy, who was working as a permanent employee in the second respondent Tea Estate died on 7. 1999. On 7. 1999, at 10.45 a.m., when Periyasamy was working in the Estate by plucking tea leaves, he developed chest pain and the Supervisor called for an ambulance and Periyasamy was taken to Mudis Garden Group Hospital. When they reached the hospital, the Doctor examined the said Periyasamy and declared that he had died. The wife of the deceased Periyasamy filed a claim petition before the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour on the above narrated facts stating that her husband was aged about 48 years at the time of death on 7. 1999, and he had died in the course of employment and due to stress of employment and entitled to compensation under the Workmens Compensation Act.

2. The claim was resisted by the Insurance Company, the appellant herein. The Insurance Company, the second opposite party before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour filed a counter statement stating that the death was a natural cause which is stated as "Myocardial Infarction". Several other contentions were also raised.

.3. The Commissioner for Workmens Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour considering the evidence on record and the pleadings of parties held that the deceased Periyasamy suffered chest pain on 7. 1999 and died while he was in employment with the first opposite party, namely, the Management of the Estate. The Commissioner held that Periyasamy died due to chest pain at the time of employment and therefore, the claimant is entitled to invoke the provisions of the Workmens Compensation Act. Based on the income of the deceased, the compensation at Rs.1,47,217/- was determined together with 12% interest. While coming to such conclusion the Commissioner relied upon the decision reported in 1998 L.L.J Volume II 30 (United India Insurance Company Vs. C.S.Gopalakrishnan), wherein the Kerala High Court held as hereunder:-

."..... in order to bring the accident within Sec.3 it is not necessary that it should be established that the workman died as a result of exceptional strain or some exceptional work that he did on the day in question. If the nature of work and hours of work caused great strain to the employee and the strain caused the unexpected death, it can be said that the workman died as a result of accident which has arisen in the course of his employment"

4. On going through the award, it is apparent that the finding of the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation is based only on the decision of the Kerala High Court. The Commissioner merely held that the deceased died on 7. 1999, at 10.45 a.m. while he was working in the tea garden and there is a link between the death and the employment.

.5. The appellant aggrieved by the finding of the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour has challenged the award on the ground that the deceased did not suffer any injury and there was no accident. Therefore, the deceased did not die in an accident in the course of employment and the death was not out of employment. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of the Apex Court reported in (2007-1-L.W. 601) Shakuntala Chandrakant Shreshti Vs. Prabhakar Maruti Garvali & another stating that there is no causal connection between the death and the employment. No accident occurred during the course of employment causing the death of the deceased. There is no evidence brought on record to show that the deceased died due to stress and strain of work in the course of employment. The appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law:-

."Whether the death of deceased could be said to be due to personal injury caused in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case?"

6. Learned counsel for the first respondent/claimant submitted that the death had occurred on 7. 1999, at