This appeal, under Section 30 of Workmens Compensation Act, 1923, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 31-05-2005, passed by the Workmen Compensation Commis sioner/assistant Labour Commissioner, Haldwani, Nainital in Workmen Claim Case No. 15/2005, Smt. Suman Devi versus Manager, Polyplux Lohiya Head Road & another, thereby awarding a sum of Rs. 3,79,180/- to the claimants, against the National Insurance Com pany Limited (appellant before this Court), along with an interest of 8% per annum, from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of judgment.

2. The claimant-Suman Devi filed a claim petition under the provisions of Workmens Compensation Act, for grant of compensation on account of death of her husband-Munna Lal. According to the claimant, her husband-Munna Lal was employed as Operator in Polyplux Corporation Limited, Khatima. On 1-6- 2004, when her husband-Munna Lal was returning to his house after finish ing his duty of first shift, he met with an accident on account of storm on his way near Jhankat Chauraha as a tree fell on him and he succumbed to his in juries on the way while being carried to Khatima Hospital. The claimant has pleaded that her husband-Munna Lal was getting Rs. 4500/- per month as sal ary, along with bonus and other allow ances, at the time of his death. The claimant has also pleaded that her hus band-Munna Lal died during the course of his employment while he was return ing to his house after finishing his duty hours. Therefore, the claimant claimed for a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- as compen sation, along with interest @ 12% per annum and penalty.

3. The appellant, who was the re spondent before the Workmen Compen sation Commissioner, filed the written statement stating therein that death of the deceased-workman did not take place during the course of his employment. It has further pleaded that neither the death took place within the campus of the factory nor during the course of ac tual employment or during the period of his duty.

4. Respondent no. 2-Manager Polyplux Corporation, filed the written statement stating therein that the de ceased was working as an Operator in the factory and on the date of accident when he was returning to his house af ter his duty hours, he met with an acci dent on account of storm on the way as a tree fell on him and he succumbed to injuries. He has further pleaded that the deceased-work man of the factory was insured by the National Insurance Com pany Limited on the date of accident, therefore, the legal liability to pay the amount of compensation rests upon the Insurance Company.

5. The Workmen Compensation Commissioner after having considered the entire evidence adduced by the par ties and perusing the material available on the record, came to the conclusion that the workman died while he was go ing to his house after discharging his. of ficial duty, therefore, the workman died on account of the accident during the course of the employment. The Work men Compensation Commissioner having considered the age of the deceased as well as his monthly salary awarded the compensation for a sum of Rs. 4,09, 514/- (including the interest from the date of filing the petition till the date of judgment ).

6. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment and award, the In surance Company has preferred the ap peal, under Section. 30 of Workmens Compensation Act before this Court.

7. Heard Sri Manish Dalakoti, hold ing brief of Sri D. S. Patni, learned coun sel for the appellant, Sri B. D. Pande, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and perused the record. None has ap peared for respondent no. 1.

8. On the basis of pleadings ad duced by the parties the relevant issue for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the death of the deceased was caused during the course of employment or out of employment ? And as to whether the Commissioner is right in holding that the alleged injury caused to the deceased due to which he suc cumbed to injuries comes w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document