- (1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act against the award of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Udaipur, dated July 31, 1975.
(2.) THE facts of the case relevant for the disposal of this appeal are that Narain Lal was working as a motor driver in the office of the Executive Engineer, Udaipur, The applicant has contended that on April 6, 1971 he received personal injuries in the accident which occurred in the course of his employment. The jeep in which the applicant was going had turned over and as a result thereof the applicant received several serious injuries in his head and the collar bone was broken. The monthly wages which the applicant was receiving at the time of the accident were Rs. 258. It was contended that as the respondent had not made any payment of compensation to him payable under the Act, he has filed an application claiming payment of compensation to the extent of Rs. 11,500.
(3.) THE opposite party, however, denied the claim of the applicant stating that the applicant was not in the employment of the opposite party on April 6, 1971. It was also contended by the opposite party that the minor injuries received by the applicant were not covered under Schedule I of the Workmen's Compensation Act. It was also contended by the opposite party that the applicant has not suffered any loss due to this accident as he has resumed duties after having obtained a medical certificate of fitness for resuming duty. It was also contended that the applicant was given leave on full pay during the time he was under treatment, and after resuming his duty, the applicant is doing the same job which he used to do before the accident, and that if the accident has resulted in any incapacity to the applicant still the applicant is being paid his full salary. Thus, the applicant was not incapacitated in his earning. The learned Compensation Commissioner struck the following issues: 1. Whether the injuries to the workmen during the course of the employment resulted into permanent total disablement? 2. Whether the injuries caused to the workman due to negligence of the workman himself? 3. To what amount workman is entitled to for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923? 4. Relief?;