This appeal, under Section 30 of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 31.05.2005, passed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner/Assistant Labour Commissioner, Haldwani, Nainital in Workmen Claim Case No. 15/2005, Smt. Suman Devi versus Manger, Polyplux Lohiya Head Road & another, thereby awarding a sum of Rs. 3,79,180/- to the claimants, against the National Insurance Company 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 Workmen’s 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 finishing his duty to 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 injuries 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 salary, along with bonus and other allowances, at the time of his death. The claimant has also pleaded that her husband – Munna Lal died during the course of his employment while he was returning to his house after finishing his duty hours. Therefore, the claimant claimed for a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- as compensation, along with interest @ 12% per annum and penalty.

3. The appellant, who was the respondent before the Workmen Compensation 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 actual employment or during the period of his duty.

4. Respondent no. 2 – Manager Polyplux Corporation, filed the written statement stating therein that the deceased was working as an Operator in the factory and on the date of accident the factory and on the date of accident when he was returning to his house after his duty hours, he met with an accident 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 Company 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 parties and perusing the material available on the record, came to the conclusion that the workman died while he was going to his house after discharging his official duty, therefore, the workman died on account of the accident during the course of the employment. The Workmen 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 Insurance Company has preferred the appeal, under Section 30 of Workmen’s Compensation Act, before this Court.

7. Heard Sri Manish Dalakoti, holding brief of Sri D.S. Patni, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri B.D. Pande, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and perused the record. None has appeared for respondent no. 1.

8. On the basis of pleadings adduced 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