AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.—In this appeal filed by the appellant Divisional Mechanical Engineer, R.S.R.T.C., Bikaner, the appellant is challenging the order dated 07.10.1998 passed by the Commissioner, Workman Compensation, Hanumangarh in claim application No. WC 2/96, whereby, compensation to the tune of Rs. 19,152/- including interest has been awarded in favour of the respondent-claimant.
Brief facts of the case are that the respondent workman filed application for claiming compensation on the ground that on 22.11.1983 when he was discharging duties as driver at Hanumangarh Depot he suffered injury in the left leg and dislocation of the hip bone. The said injury was sustained by him while pushing the bus. After above incident, the claimant-respondent remained under medical treatment and after recovery he joined the duties, but, he was not in a position to discharge duties as driver, therefore, he was assigned light duties.
For the above deficiency suffered while performing duties, the claimant-respondent prayed for compensation to the authorities of the Corporation but no compensation was given to him. Therefore, application was filed before the Commissioner, Workman Compensation, Hanumangarh for claiming compensation.
The appellant Corporation filed its reply anf after considering all aspects of the matter, the learned Commissioner, Workman Compensation, Hanumangarh awarded compensation in the tune of Rs. 10,080/- and interest Rs. 9,072/- vide judgment dated 07.10.1998. The said award is under challenge in this appeal.
After hearing both the parties and considering entire facts of the case, I am of the opinion that the learned Commissioner has not committed any error while granting award in favour of the respondent-claimant because the appellant is not disputing the incident and admittedly the claimant-respondent was drawing Rs1,000/- when he was working on the post of driver and, after the accident, he has submitted the disability certificate and learned Commissioner while considering the entire matter awarded compensation of Rs. 10,080/- along with 6% interest. I see no reason to interfere in the award of compensation because the Corporation is not disputing the incident in which the claimant-respondent suffered injuries as well as the fact that the claimant was working on the post of driver and discharging duties he suffered the injuries.
In view of the above, this appeal is devoid of force and is dismissed accordingly.