IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL A.O. No. 511 of 2005 Smt. Angoori Devi & others … Appellants Vs Commissioner, Workmen Compensation/ Additional District Magistrate, Dehradun & another … Respondents Sri M.C. Pant, learned counsel for the appellants Sri L.K. Verma, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Gopal Naraian, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 has been filed by the claimants/appellants against the judgment and order dated 27.09.2005 passed by Workmen Compensation Commissioner/Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Dehradun in Case No. 3 of 2001 whereby the learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner dismissed the claim of the claimants. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the deceased – Rasheed was working as a watchman in the farmhouse of opposite party – D.P. Agarwal at Dhakrani, Tehsil Vikas Nagar, Dehradun and used to earn Rs. 1500/- per month as salary. According to the claimants, the deceased – Rashid used to live in a small room in the farm and remained on duty at 24 hours. On 24.09.1999, the deceased was performed his duty and on the same night two persons came from Dehradun and stayed in the night with the deceased. In the morning, appellant No. 2 – Shamsher Ali (son of the deceased) found that his father was missing from there. After searching a lot, a report was lodged in the police station Vikasnagar. The body of the deceased was recovered on 08.03.1999 at about 06:45 2 p.m. from Dhalipur Power House. It has further alleged that the deceased was 60 years of age and used to earn Rs. 1,500/- per month as salary. According to the claimants, the deceased was working under the employment of opposite party, therefore, the claimants filed the claim petition under the provision of Workmen’s Compensation Act for a sum of Rs. 3,05,000/- as compensation. 3. Thereafter notices were issued to the opposite party and he has filed the written statement alleging therein that the deceased working as a Chowkidar and he used to pay a sum of Rs. 500/- per month as salary and apart from Chowkidari, the main work of the deceased to earn his livelihood was to sell milk and to do the work of black magic (Jhar-Phook) giving consultation to the people. It has further alleged that amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards mental pain, Rs. 1,50,000/- towards financial loss, Rs. 50,000/- towards love and affection and Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses claimed by the claimants under aforesaid heads from the applicant/opposite party as compensation appears to be wrong. It has also alleged that there is no relation between the death of the deceased and the employment. Therefore, the claim filed by the claimants was liable to be dismissed. 4. On the basis of the material available on record and after hearing learned counsel for the parties, the learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner dismissed the claim of the claimants vide judgment and order dated 27.09.2005. 5. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order, the claimants/appellants preferred this appeal before this Court. 3 6. Heard Sri M.C. Pant, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri L.K. Verma, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Gopal Narayan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and perused the record. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted before the Court that the deceased person was working as a Chowkidar in the firm of respondent No. 2 and he was found missing during the course of his employment, therefore, the claimants are entitled for compensation under the provision of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923. In order to support his case, he has placed before me Section 3 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 and submitted that the workman is entitled to get compensation from the employer. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the appellants at great length and going through Section 3 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, I do not find any force in the submission advanced by learned counsel for the appellant. In this case, according to the claim petition, the deceased/workman was found missing from 24.02.1999 and his dead body was recovered from Dholipur Power Station on 08.03.1999 at another place. Learned counsel for the appellants could not show any evidence before the court below, which may indicate that the death of the deceased was related to his employment. The record further reveals that the deceased died due to drowning in the water and the deceased was living in the firm along with his family members and the body of the deceased was got recovered from the Dholipur Power Station and not from the place of his work. As per the submission of the claimants, the deceased died during the course of the employment, but there is nothing on record, which may suggest that the workman died during the course 4 of his employment. The learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner after going through the record and scrutinizing the evidence has rightly dismissed the claim of the claimants/appellants. It is also not disputed between the parties that the deceased was mainly earning his livelihood by selling milk and doing black magic (Jhar-Phook), therefore, it cannot be said that the death of the deceased took place during the course of employment. He used to go outside and the dead body of the deceased was recovered from another place and the postmortem report reveals that the deceased died due to drowning in water. I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner. There is nothing on record which may connect the death of the deceased to his employment. The learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner has rightly dismissed the petition of the claimants/appellants. I am in total agreement with the finding recorded by the learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner. The appeal lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 26.11.2008 ASWAL