IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 1081 of 1989 (O&M) Chhotu Ram ...Appellant vs Haryana State Electricity Board and another ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant. ... Rajesh Bindal, J. Challenge in the present appeal is to the order dated 24.5.1989 whereby the claim of the appellant was rejected by the Commissioner under the Employee's Compensation Act. Briefly, the pleaded facts of the case are that the appellant was in the employment of the respondents on daily wage from 4.4.1980 to 31.12.1983. On 14.11.1983, while working in village Machi, he met with an accident. As in the accident, his private parts were damaged, he claimed compensation from the respondents. After going through the evidence led by the appellant, the Commissioner rejected his claim vide order dated 24.5.1989, which he has impugned in the present appeal. The claim of the appellant is that in the accident which took place on 14.11.1983 while on duty, his private parts were damaged and claimed a huge amount on that account. But a perusal of the impugned order shows that he joined his duty on the very next day. If he had suffered any such serious injury, he could not join duty on the next day. This fact clearly falsified the claim of the appellant. It has also come in the evidence that the appellant remained in the employment of the respondents upto 29.11.1983 and during this period no such accident took place with the appellant. Since the appellant has failed to prove his case, the same was rightly rejected. No infirmity is found in the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 1.3.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs Judge