FA/3138/1996 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 3138 of 1996 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Appellant(s) Versus JAYABEN JIVRAJBHAI & 6 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MS TRUSHA PATEL AGP for Appellant(s) : 1 - 3. MS SUDHA R GANGWAR for Defendant(s) : 1 - 7. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 28/07/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 20.03.1992, passed by the learned Civil Judge ((SD) Amreli in Workmen's Compensation Application no. 23 of 1986 whereby, the respondents were directed to recover FA/3138/1996 2/3 JUDGMENT an amount of Rs.21,000/- towards compensation, along with the interest @ 6% after one month from the date of the incident and has also imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/-. 2.0. The short facts of the case are :- 2.1. Respondents nos. 1 to 7 are the legal heirs of deceased-Jivrajbhai Hansrajbhai. The deceased was working as a Watchman in the District and Sessions Court, Amreli. While discharging his duty, on 14.10.1981, the deceased was unfortunately murdered. The legal heirs of the deceased therefore, preferred an application being Workmen's Compensation Application No. 23 of 1986 before the Court of learned Civil Judge (SD) Amreli. 2.2. The learned trial Judge, after hearing the parties and considering the evidence on record, allowed the application and granted compensation to the tune of Rs.21,000 with running interest @ 6% after one month from the date of incident. Hence, this appeal. 3.0. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Having perused the record of the case, it is clear that the deceased was working as a Watchman and that while discharging his duties, he was murdered. Hence, being a FA/3138/1996 3/3 JUDGMENT Government servant on the regular establishment and also the fact that the deceased is covered under the definition of 'Workman', the impugned order is just and proper. Considering the fact that the deceased had died during the course of employment, the State ought not to have preferred this appeal. Looking to the smallness of the amount involved, the appeal is required to be dismissed. 4.0. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed. It is made clear that this appeal is entertained since the amount involved is very small and, therefore, the same shall not be treated as precedent in any other proceedings. [K.S. JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/