1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 31.07.2007 passed by the Exofficio Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Act, Bharuch in Workmen's Compensation ( Fatal) Case No. 9 of 2002 whereby the said application has been allowed and the claimant has been awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,91,698/ along with interest @ 9% and also imposed 50% penalty i.e Rs. 95, 849/ on the appellant.
2.0 According to the respondents, on 05.05.2000 Pravinsinh Narpatsinh Rathod was workman of the appellant and was doing work of making boxes and at 10.20 hours, due to mental harassment in the office, he fell down. He was taken to the Hospital where he was declared died. The legal heirs of the deceased therefore, filed Workman Compensation ( Fatal) Application No. 9 of 2002 before the ExOfficio Workman Compensation Commissioner at Bharuch wherein the Commissioner had awarded the aforesaid amount of compensation which is challenged in the present appeal.
3.0 Learned advocate appearing for the appellant has contended that the deceased was contract labour employed by the respondent No.5 original opponent No.2. She submitted that the deceased Pravinsing died because of the heart attack and it was natural death. There was no nexus between the heavy work load or excessive stress and continuous work and heart attack. According to her the Tribunal ought not to have passed award against the appellant and that it was not proved that the workman died due to harassment.
4.0 Heard learned advocate for the appellant. From the record the learned Commissioner found that the deceased was a workman as per the provisions of the Act and this was not denied by the appellant. According to the wife of the deceased, the deceased was not having any kind of ailment and during the course of employment in pursuance of some threatening he fell down and subsequently died. She also stated that when the deceased left home for work his condition was good. Therefore it was established that he died during the course of employment. Further Exh.48 is the cover note establishes that the appellant is liable to make the compensation.
5.0 Learned advocate for the appellant is not in a position to assail the judgement and award of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner. The appeal is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed accordingly.
6.0 In view of dismissal of First Appeal, Civil Application would not survive and the same is dismissed accordingly.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*