Appeal against a workmen's compensation order was dismissed. The Court held appellants failed to prove the deceased was intoxicated at the time of the accident.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
FAO-5746-2009 (O&M)
[ 1 ]
::::::::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
FAO-5746-2009(O&M) Date of decision:01.02.2012
State of Haryana and others ...Appellants Versus Ram Niwas ...Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
Present: Mr. Kulvir Narwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
Mr. Surinder Gandhi, Advocate, for the respondent. *****
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J.
The State of Haryana is in appeal against order dated 19.03.2009 of the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, Rohtak Circle [for short “Commissioner”], wherein they have challenged the finding recorded on issue No.1.
In brief, as per the case of the claimant (respondent herein), Anil Kumar (deceased) was a Class IV employee posted as such at Water Works, Khudana, District Mahandergarh. On 12.07.2007, in the process of repairing a water pump, he was asked by the mechanic to bring a bucket of water from the nearby tank and while the deceased was fetching the water, he slipped, fell in the tank and drowned. The appellants did not deny that the deceased was their employee and was working on the Water Pump but it is alleged that he fell down in the tank in an inebriated state. The learned Commissioner has found that the appellants have failed to prove on record from the Post Mortem Report Ex.AW2 that the deceased was under the influence of alcohol at the time of his death.
I have heard both the learned counsel for the parties in detail
FAO-5746-2009 (O&M)
[ 2 ]
::::::::
but I am unable to agree with the arguments raised by learned counsel for the appellants that the deceased was in an intoxicating state when he was working at the site.
In view thereof, I do not find any merit in the present appeal which is, thus, dismissed.
February 01, 2012 vinod*
(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the finding that appellants failed to prove the deceased was under the influence of alcohol is sustainable?
State of Haryana and others
Ram Niwas
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
