Mewa Singh and Another vs Darshan Singh

V.K. Jhanji, J.—Respondent was employed by the appellants as a farm-worker and in the course of his employment, he received injuries. Respondent made a claim under the Workmen�s'' Compensation Act on the allegation that while he was working on the Tokka Thresher Machine, his left hand was entangled due to which he suffered amputation of all the fingers and the thumb of his left hand. He also claimed that at the time of accident, he was earning wages of Rs. 450/- per month and was over 15 years of age. Therefore, he claimed that he is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 20,580/-.

The claim petition was contested by the appellants.

The Commissioner under the Workmen''s Compensation Act, on the appreciation of the evidence on the record, found permanent partial disablement and los of earning capacity to the extent of 70 per cent and, therefore, allowed a sum of Rs. 20,580/- as compensation to the respondent. This order is being challenged by the appellants in this Court through this appeal.

After hearing the learned Counsel for the appellants, find no merit in this appeal. Respondent in order to prove his claim not only examined himself but also examined Dr. Y.C. Markan, Civil Hospital as AW-3. Dr. Y.C. Markan in his statement stated that the respondent was operated upon on 2.5.1981 and amputation was done of his left hand fingers at M.P. Joint level and of the thumb at DIP joint level. He also produced medical certificate, Exhibit A-5 to this effect. On the basis of the evidence, the authority under the Workmen''s Compensation Act found permanent partial disablement and loss of earning capacity to the extent of 70 per cent as per entry 3 entered in Part-II, Schedule-I with reference to Section 2(1)(i) and 4 of the Act.

Learned Counsel for the appellants has not been able to point but as to how the compensation awarded is excessive or not in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

From the evidence on the record, I find that the compensation awarded to the respondent is in accordance with the provisions of the Act and no inter-ference is called for in the findings arrived at by the Commissioner under the Workmen�s'' Compensation Act

Consequently, In find no merit in the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs.

The respondent was allowed to withdraw only a sum of Rs. 17,640/- vide order dated 12.11.1986. The respondent shall now be allowed to withdraw the remaining amount.