- (1.) Instant appeal is directed against the order dated 25.6.2015 passed by Commissioner, Employees Compensation Authority, Sikar, in Claim Petition No.W.C.C./N.F./06/2010, by which the claim to the extent of Rs.2,09,150/- has been directed to be allowed to the respondent Shankar Lal, who was claimed to be working as khallasi with Jeevanram on a vehicle, truck, bearing no.RJ 23G 3501. It was claimed before the Commissioner that Shankar Lal was working as khallasi/cleaner on the aforesaid vehicle and on 5.12.2008 while he was working as per directions of respondent no.2 Jeevanram and while he was going from Rajasthan to Maharashtra for taking khal-churi, the tyre of the truck got punctured and while he was putting the truck on jack, the jack slipped on account of which he got seriously injured and fracture in his right leg. He was carried to a nearby National Hospital at Ashok Nagar Bhiwandi (Thane), where he was operated upon and was discharged on 22.12.2008. Accordingly, a claim was lodged and the Commissioner after analysing the material on record, has allowed the claim of Rs.2,09,150/-, which is assailed by the appellant herein.
(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that serious illegality has been committed by the Commissioner while allowing the claim vide impugned order, which was not even worth consideration as even the respondent-applicant did not prove by acceptable evidence that he was working as khallasi/clearner with Jeevanram on vehicle no.RJ 23G 3501. It is further claimed by the counsel for the appellant that no report or FIR or any complaint of any sort was made by the applicant, and the Commissioner without any apparent basis has taken into consideration the averments made in the claim petition and has allowed the claim. He further contended that the incident took place in Maharashtra whereas the claim was lodged at Sikar which is even otherwise not proper. He further contended that even eye-witnesses came to the conclusion that Shankar Lal, the applicant, was working in a factory named as Borka Steel Factory, Ashok Nagar, Bhiwandi, District Thane (Maharashtra) and that he was injured while going on a motorcycle and statements of such eye-witnesses have been ignored. He further contended that the disability was only 30% even as per Medical Board, however, the doctors were not made available in the witness-box to certify the medical evidence, and contended that the order is perverse and needs consideration by this court. He relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar & Another, 2011 1 TAC 785 (S.C.), and by this court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Jitendra Kumar & Another S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.2473/2004 decided on 21.1.2004,
(3.) I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel and perused the material on record and other material placed before the court.;