Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1954 (1) TMI 10

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to join duty. While on his way, he was stabbed by some unknown persons. It is not disputed by the railway company that the deceased died as a result of an accident nor was it disputed that the accident arose in the course of employment. - - - - - Dated:- 20-1-1954 - Chagla, Dixit J. JUDGMENT Chagla, C.J. 1. This is a rather unusual case arising under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The facts briefly are that the deceased was a mukadam employed in the Central Railway at Kurla station and he lived in the railway quarters adjoining the Kurla railway station. It was found as a fact that the only access for the deceased from his quarters to the Kurla railway station was through the compound of the railway quarters. On 20-12-1952 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to him; the peril must be incidental to his employment. It is also clear that he must not by his own act add to the peril or extend the peril. But if the peril which he faces has nothing to do with his own action or his own conduct, but it is a peril which would have! been faced by any other employee or any other member of the public, then if the accident arises out of such peril, a causal connection is established between the employment and the accident. In this particular case what is established is that the employee while in the course of his employment found himself in a spot where he was assaulted and stabbed to death. He was in the place where he was murdered by reason of his employment. He would have been safely in his bed but for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Eavdekar and my brother Mr. Justice Dixit held that the workman had received personal injury as a result of an accident arising out of his employment. Then there is another decision which is not reported to which I and Mr. Justice Gajendra-gadkar were a party and which is - 'General Manager, G. I. P. Rly., V, T., Bombay v. Godrej Navroji Unwala'. F. A. No. 527 of 1948 (Bom.) (B) where we held that the workman who was serving as an Assistant Engine Driver in the G. I. P. Railway Company and who was returning after completing his duty at Kalyan by the Kalyan Local Railway and was set upon by some soldiers and thrown on the railway lines and received injuries, that the injuries arose out of the employment and he was entitled to compensation. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... from authorities I should be prepared to hold that it was satisfied where, as here, it has been established as a fact that it was as arising out of her employment that the appellant was under the roof by the falling of which she was injured." To apply that test to the facts of this case, it arose out of the employment of the deceased that he found himself at a spot where he was assaulted and murdered. 5. Mr. Desai has strenuously argued that the distinguishing feature of this case is that the employee was murdered and according to him there is always a motive for a murder, and therefore it could not be said that the risk which the employee ran was a risk which would have been run by any other employee or member of the public. According .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... place and he was there because he had to be there by reason of his employment, and he further establishes that because he was there he met with an accident, he has discharged the burden which the law places upon him. The law does not place an additional burden upon the applicant to prove that the peril which the employee faced and the accident which arose because of that peril was not personal to him but was shared by all the employees or the members of the public. Mr. Desai would have an applicant prove not only that the employee was murdered, but that in murdering him the murderers had no personal motive against the murdered man but he would have murdered any other employee of the railway company as well. We refuse to hold that the law .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates