- (1.) It is submitted by Shri Manish Kumar Nigam, learned Counsel for the appellant that as per the Medical Certificate brought on record before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, the claimant -respondent No. 1 sustained non -scheduled injuries, and the extent of disability was 45%.
(2.) The Medical Certificate was silent as regards the extent of loss of earning capacity, as a result of the disability sustained by the claimant -respondent No. 1. It is submitted that as per the provisions contained in Item (ii) of Clause (c) of Sub -section (1) of Sec. 4 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 read with Explanation II to the said Clause (c), the loss of earning capacity ought to be assessed by a qualified Medical Practitioner in case of non -scheduled injuries. There being no such assessment in the present case, the submission proceeds, the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner erred in law in assessing the extent of loss of earning capacity as 100%, which was contrary to the aforesaid provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
(3.) It is further submitted that the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner failed to appreciate the distinction between the extent of disability and the extent of loss of earning capacity as a result of such disability.;