The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of 'arising out of employment' and the requirement of a causal connection between the accident and the employment for the award of compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

B. P. DAS, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 is directed against the judgment passed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Rourkela (in short, 'w. C. Commissioner') in W. C. Case No. 23 of 1996.

( 2 ) THE brief facts leading to this appeal are that Sona Sethi and Samadri Sethi, the wife and mother respectively of one puranram Sethi of Orampada in Uditnagar (Rourkela) filed an application before the w. C. Commissioner, Rourkela, claiming compensation for the death of Puranram sethi in an accident arising out of and in course of his employment on 163. 1996, while working in the mini truck bearing registration No. CR 14-B 2635. It is stated by Sona Sethi that her husband, namely, puranram Sethi was employed in the aforesaid truck by respondent No. 1, Ratan Thakur, and on 15. 3. 1996, Puranram Sethi left home at 7 a. m. for duty and did not return. On 16. 3. 1996 somebody informed her to go to Kalunga where she could know about her husband. At Kalunga she could know from her father-in-law that her husband went towards Gurundia and was murdered by dacoits near Tanda forest in the night of 15. 3. 1996. It is stated that her husband was getting his salary of Rs. 2,000 per month and was 27 years old at the time of death.

( 3 ) THE owner as well as the insurer filed their respective written statements. The insurer took the plea that the deceased was not employed in the alleged mini truck and did not die in the course of employment. The owner of the vehicle in his written statement stated that the deceased was employed as a driver in the mini truck and on 15. 3. 1996 while he was going towards tanda side by driving the vehicle, some dacoits attacked him with the intention to loot the goods and money for which he was murdered while he was on duty. According to the owner the deceased was getting his salary of Rs. 1,800 per month.

( 4 ) THE W. C. Commissioner framed as many as four issues and while answering those issues, he came to the conclusion that the deceased was engaged as a driver by the owner of the truck in question and as such was a workman under the Act and that the deceased died due to an accident in course of employment. The W. C. Commissioner considering the fact that the deceased was aged 27 years and his wages was Rs. 1,800 per month, assessed the compensation at Rs. 1,92,213 and as the vehicle was duly insured with the insurer, i. e. , the present appellant, directed the insurer to indemnify the owner of vehicle and to deposit the compensation amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the same would carry interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of receipt till its realisation.

( 5 ) IT is needless to say that an appeal under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act is maintainable only where substantial point of law is involved in the same.

( 6 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant submits that the death of the deceased by no stretch of imagination can be said to have been due to an accident which arose out of and in course of his employment.

( 7 ) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the appellant, the aforesaid is a substantial point of law, which needs to be decided by this court.

( 8 ) ON perusal of the judgment of W. C. Commissioner, it is found that the answer by the W. C. Commissioner under issue no. 2 by holding that in the circumstances of the case the murder can be considered as accident.

( 9 ) THE question now raised has not come up before this court for the first time. Earlier also similar question was dealt with by this court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nalini Dehwari, 2002 0 ACJ 1796 (Orissa), wherein the death of a workman had occurred when the truck in which he was employed as a driver was waylaid on its to Burla by some miscreants and the consignment of Amul Spray was looted and the driver was killed.

( 10 ) THIS court relied upon seve