| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1963 SLG 3162 = 1963 SLD 3162 = 1963 PLD 21 |
Sindh High Court
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 25 of 1962, decided on 19th July 1962.
Presented By:Inamullah, J
S. Inayat Ali for Appellant. S. M. Hafeez for
Respondent. Dates of hearing : 18th and 25th May 1962.
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 25 of 1962, decided on 19th July 1962.
Presented By:Inamullah, J
S. Inayat Ali for Appellant. S. M. Hafeez for
Respondent. Dates of hearing : 18th and 25th May 1962.
HASHAM-Appellant
VERSUS
SAEEDA BEGUM-Respondent
Law: Workmen's Compensation Act (VIII of 1923)
Section:
Workmen's Compensation Act (VIII of 1923) [as amended by Workmen's Compensation (Amendment) Act (XI of 1957)], Seh. 4-Cause of action accruing, and proceeding commenced, before repeal of Schedule by Repealing and Amending Ordinance (I of 1961)-Compensation can be rightly awarded under Sch. 4 as amended in 1957-Repealing and Amending Ordinance (I of 1961), S. 4. Interpretation of Statutes-Language to be so construed as to suppress mischief and advance remedy. Maxwell : "Interpretation of Statutes" 10th Edn. p. 68 Workmen's Compensation Act (VIII of 1923), Sch. 2(xxvi)-- "Persons employed in the handling of transport of goods"-Include clerks employed in godown. JUDGMENT This is an appeal under section 30 of the Workmen's Com pensation Act 1923. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal briefly put are these Chattan was employed as a labourer in handling bags of grain in the godown of the appellant Hasham. Chattan died on the 24th January 1960 as a result of an accident. Some bags of grain fell over his head and he succumbed to the injuries. The widow of the deceased made a claim for Rs. 9,000 in the Court of the FirstClass Sub-Judge, Hyderabad who is an ex-officio Commissioner under the Act. The learned Com missioner by his order dated the 31st January 1962 allowed a sum of Rs. 7,500 to the heirs of the deceased. The important issues that arose as a result of the pleas of the appellant were these Was the deceased Chattan an employee of the opponent . at the time of hisdeath ? Whether the deceased was a workman within the meaning of the Workmen'sCompensation Act. Whether the deceased died in the course of his employ ment. The learned Commissioner found all these issues in favour of the respondent. Mr. Inayat Ali, the learned Advocate for the appellant raised two-fold contentionsbefore me, namely that Act XI of 1957 (the Workmen's Compensation Amendment Act 1957) having been repealed by Ordinance I of 1961, the compensation of Rs. 7,500 awarded to the heirs of the deceased Chattan was illegal ; that Chattan was not…