1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.09.2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.875 of 2011 and MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.1 of 2011 Sankaralingam .. Appellant Vs. Jagannathan .. Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 against the award dated 24.12.2010 passed in W.C.No.48 of 1999 by the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli. For Appellant .. Mr.R.Vijayakumar For Respondent .. No appearance JUDGMENT The award passed in W.C.No.48 of 1999 by the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli is being challenged in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 2. The respondent herein as petitioner has filed W.C.No.48 of 1999 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli praying to pass an award for the amount mentioned therein, wherein the present appellant has been shown as sole respondent. 3. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner has served as a workman in Sugar Cane Crushing Unit of the respondent. On 06.02.1988, the petitioner has met with an accident and thereby lost his left forearm. Since the accident has happened during the course of employment, the respondent is liable to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. 4. In the counter filed on the side of the respondent, it is stated that the respondent has not set up any Sugar Cane Crushing Unit and the petitioner has not served under him as a workman and in short there is no relationship of employee and employer between the petitioner and respondent and there is no merit in the petition and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 the same deserves to dismissed. 5. On the basis of the available evidence on record, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli has awarded a compensation of Rs.82,669/-. With regard to liability fixed upon the respondent, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred at the instance of the respondent as appellant. 6. Even though, the respondent has been served with the summons, appearance has not been made. Under the said circumstances, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of on merits on the basis of the contention putforth on the side of the appellant/respondent. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/respondent has vehemently contended that the appellant/respondent has entered into an agreement with Aaruran Sugar Mills with regard to supply of sugar canes and under the said circumstances question of setting up of Sugar Cane Crushing Unit in the field of the appellant/ respondent does not arise and there is no relationship of employee and employer amongst the petitioner and respondent and the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli simply on the ground that the appellant/respondent is owning agricultural lands, has erroneously passed the award in question and therefore the same is liable to be set aside. 8. In the petition it has been specifically stated that the accident has happened on 06.02.1998. The entire contention putforth on the side of the appellant/respondent is based upon Exs.R.1 and R.2. Exs.R.1 and R.2 are dated 28.05.1998 and 27.03.1998. The accident in question has happened on 06.02.1998. Even though a specific stand has been taken on the side of the appellant/respondent to the effect that even prior to accident, a separate agreement has come into existence in between the appellant/respondent and Aaruran Sugar Mills, no agreement has been filed for the scrutiny of the Court. Unless the agreement alleged to have been entered into in between the appellant/respondent and the said mill has been filed for the scrutiny of the Court, it is very difficult to accept the contention putforth on the side of the appellant/ respondent and therefore for the purpose of giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant/respondent, this Court is of the view to set aside the award passed in W.C.No.48 of 1999 and remit the matter to the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli. 9. In fine, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed without costs and the award passed in W.C.No.48 of 1999 by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli is set aside and W.C.No.48 of 1999 is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 remitted to the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli. The appellant/ respondent is directed to produce the agreement alleged to have been entered into in between the appellant/respondent and Aaruran Sugar Mils. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(T&P) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Tiruchirappalli. Copy to: The Section Officer, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai +1cc to Mr.R.Vijayakumar, Advocate, Sr.No.30267 C.M.A(MD)No.875 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 07.09.2011 smn SMA/03.10.2011/4C/3P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/