1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.107 OF 2010 Smt. P. Bhavani Kodanda Rao .... Appellant (Ori. applicant) Vs. Four Etoiles Shipping LIC & Anr. .... Respondent (Ori. respondent) Mr. N.M. Ganguli, Advocate for appellant. None for respondent. Coram : SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. Date : 16th April, 2010 P.C. 1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 13th March 2009 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen s Compensation & ’ Judge in 6th Labour Court, Mumbai, rejecting the application for grant of compensation under the Workmen s Compensation Act, 1923. ’ 2. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal is being disposed off finally at the stage of the admission. Records and proceedings as well as the paper book is dispensed with. 3. The brief facts of the proceedings are that one Kodanda Rao was working as an ordinary Seaman with respondent no.1, since the year 1996. His duty was to do all general work of helper on board ship. From 23rd January 2000, he was on the board, the vessel of respondent no.1 MV/MT 2 four Etoiles of the Bahamian Flag at port, Charleston at America. While on duty, on 17th June 2000 at about 12.05 am, while the vessel was on the port of Baton rouge, America, when the applicant was unmooring the iron wire rope for getting the vessel ready for sailing out, iron wire rope broke away and hit him on the right side of the stomach. He was immediately moved to the hospital by name Our Lady of the Lake Hospital at “ ” Gonzales. After being treated there, he was repatriated to Mumbai and was admitted in Kalajyoti Hospital under the treatment of Company s “ ” ’ Doctor. Thereafter, he was declared unfit for sea services and hence filed application for compensation. During the pendency of the application for compensation, Kodanda Rao died and his widow, the present applicant came to be brought on record. 4. Before the trial Court, both the applicant as well as the respondent examined the respective doctors. The applicant examined Dr. Chetan Bhat who had issued certificate dated 27th August 2002 (Exhibit U-12) indicating unfitness of Kodanda Rao for sea duty. Respondent no.1 examined Dr. Vijay Belani, in whose hospital the deceased had received the treatment. Dr. Belani referred to report dated 27th June 2000 of Our Lady of the “ Lake Hospital by Dr. Willim Erwin stating that the deceased was suffering ” from T.B. and was recommended to do skin test. Dr. Belani in addition found that the deceased was suffering from HIV+ve and Herpes of the 3 chest. The deceased was issued certificate dated 20th June 2000 by the same hospital. It is the evidence of Dr. Belani that the certificate of unfitness had nothing to do with the accidental injury. Dr. Chetan Bhat, who has been examined by the appellant has also stated in his cross- examination that the unfitness of the deceased found by him had nothing to do with the injuries suffered by him in June 2000. The accident has got nothing to do with the unfitness of the applicant. On appreciating this evidence, the trial Court held that the appellant had failed to establish that Kodanda Rao sustained injuries in the course of his employment and as such he becomes unfit for service. He also failed to establish permanent disablement that resulted due to accident and rejected the application. 5. On perusal of the evidence of the two doctors as also the judgment, I am satisfied that the trial Court has dismissed the proceedings by giving cogent and convincing reasons holding that accident has nothing to do with the unfitness of the appellant. In view of this clear evidence before the court brought on record by the appellant herself, there is no question arising in this appeal for consideration of the court, either factual or legal. Hence, appeal is dismissed in limine. (Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J.)