IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.369 of 2001 Between: New India Assurance Company Limited, represented by its Divisional Manager, Vijayawada .. Appellant AND Shaik Jhonbi and 3 others .. Respondents JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the award dated 14-07-1999 in W.C.No.120 of 1997 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation-cum-Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Zone-II, Eluru. Shaik Khasim, employed as a driver on the lorry AIL 5416, owned by the 4th respondent to this appeal, died on 18-01-1996, while on duty in respect of which Crime No.5 of 1996 was registered by Challapalli Police Station under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Respondents 1 to 3 to this appeal being the wife and children of the deceased preferred the claim and the same was opposed by the appellant. During the enquiry, the 1st respondent to this appeal was examined as AW.1, the 4th respondent herein was examined as DW.1 and the Administrative Officer of the appellant was examined as DW.2 and Exs.A.1 to A.5 were marked. The Commissioner rendered the impugned award concluding that the deceased died due to heart attack, which is an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. The Commissioner opined that in view of the decisions reported in General Superintendent, Talcheru Dharmal Station v. Smt. Naik (1994 LLR 922), A. Sitaravamma v. General Manager, South Eastern Railway (1974 11 LLN 378), Madras State Legislature v. A.I. Uma (1966 II LLJ 12) and United India Insurance Company Ltd., v. C.S. Gopalakrishna (1989 II LLJ 220), the death due to heart-attack is to be considered as an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. Consequently, the Commissioner fixed the compensation payable with reference to the minimum wage payable to the driver and the age of the deceased as 42 years by the time of death. The Commissioner rounded off the compensation by applying the relevant factor to Rs.1,69,298/- and in the event of default by the owner and insurer of the vehicle, the Commissioner directed 50% penalty and simple interest to be paid. Aggrieved by the said award, the insurer contended herein that any death due to heart attack is not covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Act and for the natural death, the Commissioner has no jurisdiction to award any compensation. The Commissioner has also no jurisdiction to award any compensation beyond the claim made, which was only Rs.1,50,000/-. Hence, the insurer desired the award to be reversed. The appeal against the 4th respondent was dismissed for default vide orders of this Court dated 28-08-2009. Sri Kota Subba Rao, learned counsel for the appellant is heard and though the respondents 1 to 3 are represented by a counsel, none appeared on behalf of the respondents during the hearing on 19-07-2011 and also today. The point for consideration is whether the respondents 1 to 3 are entitled to any compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act for the death of Shaik Khasim due to heart attack while on duty as a driver on the lorry of the 4th respondent insured with the appellant? Sri Kota Subba Rao, learned counsel for the appellant rightly placed reliance on the decision reported in Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Company Ltd., v. Alahari Varalaxmi and others[1], wherein also the death of the workman while on duty was due to heart attack. The learned Judge referred to the various precedents on the aspect and laid down that where a workman dies of heart attack or chest pain, the claimants have to plead and establish by acceptable evidence that employment related stress and strain had triggered or aggravated the heart attack. The learned Judge pointed out that mere allegation to that effect would not be sufficient and if no evidence in this regard was let in by the claimants, the claim should fail. Thus, the establishment of a casual connection between the injury and the accident and the work done in the course of employment is a must, the onus of proving which is on the applicant. The mere travel in the vehicle as a driver cannot lead to any inference that the job was strenuous nor is there any automatic presumption that a death of a person due to heart attack was by way of accident within the meaning of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, as pointed out by the learned Judge. The medical opinion also will be of relevance for providing guidance as observed by the learned Judge. In the present case, even in the claim petition, it is only stated that the deceased complained of heart pain and fell on the ground and died, but the complaint or the death were not alleged to be due to any cause relating to the employment of the deceased as a driver. The allegations in the claim were only about the heart attack being suffered during the course of employment. Notwithstanding the specific denials in the counter by the insurer, the evidence of the 1st respondent herein is also only about the death while being on duty as a driver and in fact she specified that her husband was healthy before death and never suffered from any ailments. She admitted having no personal knowledge about the cause of death and the evidence of the 4th respondent herein throws no further light on the manner of death. The Administrative Officer of the insurer positively stated about there being no liability under the insurance policy in respect of any death due to heart attack due to natural causes. There was absolutely no medical evidence on record to relate any stress and strain of the job to the suffering of heart attack by the deceased and under the circumstances, the insurer cannot be made liable for compensation in the light of the binding precedent cited by Sri Kota Subba Rao, learned counsel for the appellant. As the 4th respondent did not challenge the award against him and the liability of the 4th respondent is not the subject matter of this appeal, the result of adjudication of the appeal should be confined to setting aside the award against the appellant only. In the result, the award dated 14-07-1999 in W.C.No.120 of 1997 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation-cum-Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Zone-II, Eluru is set aside against the appellant and the appeal is allowed accordingly. The parties shall bear their own costs. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 20-07-2011 Ksn [1] 2011 ACJ 1306