- (1.) JUDGMENT This appeal, under Section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 5.2.2004 passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commis­sioner/Assistant Labour Commissioner, Dehradun, in W.C.A. Case No. 29 of 2001, Smt. Som Lata and others ver­sus Pradhan Prabandhak Roza Sugar Works.
(2.) THE claimant-Smt. Som Lata, who is the wife of deceased-Ashok Kumar, filed W.C.A. Case No. 29 of 2001 claiming a compensation of Rs.1,92,140/- in respect of the death of her husband on the ground that her hus­band (deceased) was employed as Taul Lipik' under the respondent in 'Roza Sugar Works' for the crushing session 1991-92 and while discharging his duty at main gate he died at 2.00 p.m. on 11.1.1999 in the course of his employ­ment. It has been alleged that inspite of the fact that deceased was declared dead by the doctor of the employer post­mortem of deceased was not got con­ducted by the Manager of the factory. According to the claimant, the age of her husband-Ashok Kumar (deceased) was 37 years at the time of accident and he was getting a monthly salary of Rs.2000/-. The respondent filed written statement contending therein that Sri Ashok Kumar was employed on the post of trainee clerk, not on the post of Taul Lipik. It was also pleaded that deceased had started the work on the said post since the seasonal year 1992-94 and on 11.1.1999 he was on weekly rest and on the said date deceased had not done any weighing work and he remained worked in his shift w.e.f. 4th January, 1999 to 10th January, 1999. It has further been stated that plea taken by the claimant with regard to death of her husband dur­ing the course of work of weighing the articles, is not correct. It has also been alleged that death of deceased-Ashok Kumar had taken place on the day of his weekly off at his residence Roza and his dead body was sent to his perma­nent residence. It has also been pleaded that compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act is payable only in case of death of a person in the course I of or out of the employment and in this case death of the deceased is natural one, therefore, the legal heirs of de­ceased are not entitled for compensa­tion in case of natural death. It has also been pleaded that before the death de­ceased had been paid a sum of Rs.2000/- per month as traineeship allowance. In the additional pleas, it has been pleaded that on 1.1.1999 was the weekly off day of deceased-Ashok Kumar and he died in Mess Bungalow No. 7 at 2.00 p.m. and death was caused on account of heart failure. It has also been pleaded that deceased-workman does not come within the definition of 'work­man' under the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act as death of deceased had not taken place arising out or in the accident during the course of employ­ment. Therefore, the answering opposite party is not liable to pay any compen­sation under Workmen's Compensation Act.
(3.) THE learned Workmen's Compen­sation Commissioner on the basis of pleadings adduced by the parties framed following issue : “Whether deceased-Ashok Kumar died in accident arising out of or in course of employment? If yes, its ef­fect?” ;