Law: Workmen's Compensation Act (V111 of 1923)

Section: S. 2 (1) (n) & Sch. II

(a) Workmen's Compensation Act (VIII of 1923), S. 2 (1) (n) & Sch. II-List enumerated in Schedule, not exhaustive-Workman not strictly falling within definition given in S. 2 (1) (n)-Can still be treated as "workman" if he falls within any one of categories enumerated in Schedule.   The heading to the list enumerated in Schedule II to the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, starts by saying that Schedule II is a list of persons "included" in the definition. of workman. This usual rule of interpretation is that the word "includes" connotes a sense of enlargement that is to say, the persons who may not normally come within the definition at all, would nevertheless be included therein by reason of this special specification. The intention of Schedule II was that no matter whether a workman did or did not come within the definition as given in clause (n) of subsection (1) of section 2 of the Act, if he came within any of the categories enumerated in Schedule 11, he was to be treated as workman. This was done in order to make provisions for certain specific kinds of hazardous employments where accidents were likely to occur and for the benefit of the workman they were deemed to be workmen under the Act if they were employed in connection with such hazardous employments.   (4) Workmen's Compensation. Act (VIII of 1923), S. 2 (1) (n) Word "and"-Conditions necessary for excluding a person from definition of-To be read conjunctively "workman".   In order to take a person out of. the definition of "workman", given in section 2 (1) (n) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, what is required is that his employment should be both of a casual nature and that it should be otherwise than for the purposes of the employer's trade or business. The use of the word "and" in the beginning of the section denotes that these two conditions are to read conjunctively and not disjunctively.   Bachia Misiri v. Shanti A I R 1946 All. 473 and The Khulna Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. v. Bakadur Sardar and another 42CWN516rel.   Workmen's Compensation Act (VIII of…