1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1923/ 2010 (Damayanti Indal Tirpude and another vs. Mr.Mohammad Sheikh and others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 30, 2010. Heard Mr N.B.Bargat, learned Advocate for petitioners and Mr Shinde, learned Advocate for respondent no.1. The Commissioner under Workmen Compensation held that the petitioners could not prove that death of Pramod was on account of any accident. Advocate Bargat argued that the deceased was found lying at work site. However, there is nothing on record to show that said death was on account of any accident and that accident had any connection with employment of deceased. Reliance placed upon the judgment reported in 2007(6) Mh.L.J. 108 in the matter of (State of Maharashtra vs. Arti wd/o Ashok Kapshikar & others ) is totally misconceived because there workman was murdered by his subordinates for refusing leave. Thus, the incident definitely has got connection with performance of duties and, therefore, has been treated as an accident for the purposes of Workmen’s Compensation Act. 2 No case is made out warranting interference. The petition is, therefore, rejected, with no order as to costs. JUDGE sahare.