9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (11) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d beaten with a bamboo stick by some assailants and the case of the appellants is that one of the persons who so assaulted him was Shankar. The appellant was thereafter removed to the hospital and as a result of the injuries sustained on the left side of his face, his left eye was completely lost. 2. On December 10, 1957, the appellant filed an application being application No. 129 of 1957 before the Insurance Court claiming benefit from the respondent. That application was dismissed by the Insurance Court. On appeal by the appellant to this Court the order of dismissal by the Insurance Court was set aside and the appellant was given permission by this Court to file a fresh application in regard to his claim. Accordingly, on September 6, 1961 a fresh application was filed by the appellant in the Employees' State Insurance Court. In this application he made a claim for permanent disablement benefit at the rate of Rs. 1.50 paise per day from February 20, 1957 to the date of the application. The application was dismissed by the Insurance Court. The Insurance Court took the view that the appellant failed to prove that the accident which resulted in the injury arose out of the employme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and left the mill premises, his employment terminated or came to an end; that the assault on the appellant had not taken place within the mill premises; that he was assaulted while he was outside the mill premises at a distance of about 25 or 30 paces away from the main gate; that such as assault had taken place after the employments has terminated and cannot be regarded as arising in the course of employment. He has not disputed the correctness of the finding of Gatne, J., that the injury to the appellant arose out of his employment. 6. Section 51 of the Act inter alia provides for permanent disablement benefit to which an employee may be entitled. The relevant part thereof provides that subject to the provisions of the Act and the regulation, if any, made thereunder, a person who sustains permanent disablement, whether total or partial, shall be entitled to periodical payment for such disablement in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedule. The phrase "permanent total disablement" is defined in S. 2(15B). Under this Sub-section "permanent total disablement" means such disablement of a permanent nature as incapacitates an employee for all work which he was capable of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssault on the appellant had taken place at a distance of about 25 or 30 paces away from the mill premises while he was leaving the mill premises. 9. A person is only in the course of his employment while doing something which he is under an obligation, express or implied, to his employers to do or something reasonably incidental thereto. It does not follow that because the accident happens on an employer's premises it necessarily arises in the course of the employment, for it may be that the employed person has not yet entered upon his employment or alternatively that at the time of the accident he has already disentangled himself from his employment. The course of employment normally beings when the employee reaches his place of work. To extend it to the journey to and from work it must be shown that, in travelling by the particular method and route and at the particular time, the employee was fulfilling an express or implied term of his contract of service. One way of doing this is to establish that the home is the employee's base from which it is his duty to work and that he was travelling by direct route from his home to a place where he was required to work, but that is only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the time when he is at a place where he would not be but for his employment. It is further pointed out that "What may be called" "environmental accidents", i.e., accidents resulting from the surroundings in which the workmen is employed or through which he has to reach his place of work in order to carry out his obligation to his employer also fall within the scope of the phrase "arising out of or in the course of employment". This rule, of course, is subject to the exception that where the accident occurs in a public place, and the risk faced by the workman is not due to his employment but to his being on the spot as a member of the public, the employer will be liable only if the presence of the workman on the spot can be found traceable to an obligation imposed upon him by the employer". 12. In view of the clear finding of this Court that the assault on the appellant was amongst others by Shankar and the cause of the assault was an earlier incident of reprimanding his there is no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the assault that had resulted in an injury to the appellant arose out of his employment, such injury is also in the course of his employment not only when th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on in Netherton v. Coles, 1945, 1. All England Reports 227. In that case the workman was a painter and was employed by the appellant, a building contractor. By the contract of employment the employer had reserved the right to name the place of work. This place of work was a hospital, some eleven miles away from the workman's home. The contact contained provisions for travelling allowances and for free travelling facilities as between convenient centres at or near the job and the employer's office in Plymouth. The workman finished work at the hospital at 6 p.m. on May 21, 1943 and about five minutes later was killed when riding his motorcycle on the public road on his way to his home. It was found as a fact that it was not the practice of the workman to attend at the employer's office in Plymouth either before going to, or after returning from, his place of work. It was contended for the respondent, the window of the workman, that the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment, since the workman was under others to make the journey to the place of work and the journey from it must be treated on the same footing, with the consequence that the workman's employment was e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, the county Court judge found that the accident did not arise out of and in the course of the appellant's employment. On appeal, the Court of Appeal confirmed the finding of the county Court Judge. This was a case where a workman has disobeyed the orders of his superior and was suspended and it was by reason of such disobedience and suspension that he happened to meet the injury for which the claim was made. Such a case has no application to the facts of the present case. 15. In our opinion, having regard to the findings of Gatne, J., on questions of fact the conclusion is that the personal injury caused to the appellant by the accident, arose out of and in the course of his employment being an insurable employment and injury is an employment injury within the meaning of of S. 2(8) of the Act. We accordingly set aside the order passed by the Insurance Court and by this Court on December 16, 1968. We hold that the personal injury caused to the appellant by the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment and as it was an employment injury within the meaning of the Act, the appellant will be entitled to benefit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
