IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2011 / 20TH SRAVANA 1933 MFA.No. 93 of 2007 ---------------------------------- (AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.6.2006 IN W.C.C.NO.236/2004 OF THE COURT OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION (DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER), THRISSUR). .................... APPELLANT(S): APPLICANTS ------------------------------------------ 1. SUJATHA K., AGED 33 YEARS, THOTTUNGAL VEEDU, CHILLIPARAMBU, POST PARUVASSERY, 678 686, KANNAMBRA, PALAKKAD. 2. C.AMBILY, D/O.LATE C.CHANDRAN, ........DO........ 3. C.ANJALY, D/O.LATE C.CHANDRAN, .........DO....... 4. MATHU (SINCE EXPIRED), M/O.LATE C.CHANDRAN, ........DO........ BY ADV. SRI.G.D.PANICKER SMT.JEENA JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): OPPOSITE PARTIES ------------------------------------------------------ * 1. COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION (DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER), TRISSUR. 2. THE SECRETARY, KSEB, VYDUTHI BHAVAN, P.O.PATTOM PALACE, TRIVANDRUM. M.F.A.(WCC).NO.93 OF 2007 F 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION (E), KSEB, THRISSUR. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KSEB, MANNUTHY. 5. SRI.K.N.SURENDRAN (KANNAN), S/O.NARAYANAN, ELANADU, THRISSUR DIST. (PETTY CONTRACTOR ELE.SECTION, MANNUTHY). 6. SRI.K.N.SURENDHRAN (KANNAN), S/O.NARAYANAN, ELANADU, TRISSUR DIST. PETTY CONTRACTOR, ELECTRICAL SECTION, MANNUTHY. 7. BENNY T.JOHN, PETTY CONTRACTOR, ELECTRICAL SECTION, MANNUTHY, TRICHUR. (R1 IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT AS PER ORDER DATED 06.8.2009 IN IA.NO.1926 OF 2009). ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB FOR R2 TO 4 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------------- M.F.A.(WCC).NO.93 OF 2007 F ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 11th August, 2011 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Appellants are the applicants before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Thrissur. The Commissioner has awarded a sum of Rs.2,88,210/= with interest. The Commissioner has adopted Rs.3,000/= as the income. The finding as to income reads as follows: “Ext.A8 is extract of Admission Register of deceased and he had completed 37 years at the time of accident on 24.1.2004. As per the statement of the applicants, deceased was getting Rs.200/= per month from the opposite parties. The applicants have not produced documents to prove exact wage of deceased. Hence I take deceased monthly salary as Rs.3,000/= for calculation of compensation amount.” MFA.(WCC).NO.93 OF 2007 F 2 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel for the appellants would raise only one complaint before us, namely that, in similar matters, the Commissioner has taken the income at Rs.4,000/=. He has produced Annexures A1 and A2. As far as Annexure A2 is concerned, we notice that the claimants had produced Ext.A5 and it was found that the claim of the applicants that the deceased was getting daily wages at Rs.175/= was not exorbitant in the case of an electricity worker during the year 2001. No doubt, under Annexure A1, it appears that another Commissioner has proceeded to take the income at Rs.4,000/= per month. But, it is noted in the said order that the fifth respondent therein who was the petty contractor -cum- worker had admitted the wages. 3. Since there must be a question of law on the basis of which an Appeal can be based, we see no ground to allow the Appeal, as essentially, it is a question of fact. We cannot also hold MFA.(WCC).NO.93 OF 2007 F 3 that the finding is a perverse one, as there is no evidence as such, apart from the oral evidence of AW1. In such circumstances, we see no merit in the Appeal and the Appeal is dismissed. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. //True Copy// PS to Judge