1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1102 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3976 OF 2007 The United India Assurance Co. Ltd. ..Appellant. Vs. Mrs.Tara Barkuram Chauhan and ors. ..Respondents Mr.S.M.Vidhyarthi for the Appellant. Mr.M.B.Kotak for the Respondents. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 18th February, 2010 PC : 1 This is a first appeal by the Insurance Company impugning a judgment and order passed by the Commissioner under Workmen s Compensation Act on 15.4.2006 in Application (WCA) No.164/B-135 of 2002. The claim was made by the widow of Barkuram on behalf of herself and her six minor children. It is an admitted position that Barkuram died due to heart attack on 23.1.2002. It is not in dispute 2 that he died while he was carrying out duty assigned to him by the employer. Record is available before this court since compilation has been filed. Compilation includes a police statement of the cleaner of the truck of which the deceased Barkuram used to be a driver. His statement indicates that on the previous night at 6.00p.m. Gas Cylinders were loaded into the truck at Alibag. Thereafter, the loaded truck was driven. At 3.00a.m. Driver and cleaner took their dinner and thereafter, reached Bhayander at 6.a.m. They thereafter had slept for about 3.00 hours. At about 9.00 a.m. deceased Barkuram woke up and went to pass unrine and ultimately at about 9.30a.m., suffered an heart attack which was the cause of his death. 3 There is also evidence of the first claimant who is the widow of the deceased Barkuram. She has stated in her evidence that her husband hardly used to come home for 2 to 3 days in a 3 month. There is no cross examination on this aspect of the matter. In so far as police statement is concerned, same was produced through the widow and there is no cross examination on this aspect. Insurance Company has chosen not to lead any evidence in the matter. The facts on record thus indicates that deceased Barkuram drove a fully loaded truck for 12 hours through out the night and in the morning after about three hours of sleep he suffered an heart attack. This evidence was also not controverted on behalf of the owner in the written statement filed by the owner. On the aforesaid facts, it cannot be said that the trial court erred in holding that Barkuram died in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. 3 Advocate appearing for the appellant has relied upon a judgment of this court in the case of Superintending Engineer, M.S.E.B. And ors. Vs. Susheela V. Dhongade and ors. reported in 2005 ACJ 4 1024. In that case the concerned workman was required to travel long distances for performing the work of meter reading and suffered a heart attack. This Court took a view that there is no evidence to indicate that the job of meter reading was so strenuous and arduous that it could induce a heart attack. That judgment turns on its own facts and the job of meter reading cannot be compared with the job of loading cylinder and driving a laden truck through out the night. Another judgment referred to by the appellant is in the case of J. F. Pareira Vs.Eastern Watch Co. Ltd. reported 1984 A.C.J. 699 wherein salesman died due to a heart attack. The facts in that case were that he had to climb three storeys to go to the urinals where he suffered a heart attack. In that fact situation, this court held that there was no casual connection between heart attack and employment. The facts in the present case are totally different. Driving a heavy truck through the night time is certainly very strenuous activity. In my view, therefore, the 5 issue has been correctly decided on the basis of the facts of the case. This appeal could have been entertained if there was a substantial question of law involved. In my view, therefore, there is no substance in the appeal and the same is summarily rejected. 4 On request made by the Advocate on behalf of the appellant, it is directed that there should be no disbursement of the amount which has been deposited for a period of eight weeks from today. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3976 OF 2007 5 As the appeal has been summarily rejected, civil application is also rejected. ( R.S. MOHITE, J.)