Karnataka High Court
C.S. Veeranna vs Managing Director, Davanagere Sugar ... on 27 May, 1991
Equivalent citations: 1993ACJ71, 1991(2)KARLJ263, (1993)IIILLJ706KANT
ORDER Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.
1. This appeal by the workman against the order of the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (Act for short) Davanagere, dated 16.6.1990, rejecting his claim for compensation due to the disability he suffered on account of the stroke he had suffered before his superannuation from the employment of the respondent-Company, namely Davanagere Sugar Factory.
2. His application came to be rejected solely on the ground that the illness certified by the Board of Examiners appointed by the Commissioner for that purpose indicated that his partial paralysis on the right side affecting his sense of touch was not relatable to the nature of work he did in the factory which was that of a Turner.
3. Before us, however, Mr. B. Veerabhadrappa strenuously contended that the disease with which the petitioner-appellant suffered was really one falling under the last entry in part-C of Schedule-III of the Act. That item or entry is Bagassosis. Bagassosis, according to the medical dictionary, is a disease relatable to the respiratory system as a result of inhaling the dust of Bagasse, that is, the remnant of sugarcane after it is crushed and after it has been dried which in turn is normally the raw material for either burning in any oven or raw material for manufacture of paper and allied products.
4. Merely because the petitioner was working in the sugar factory, it cannot be presumed by this Court that the certified illness which is semi paralysis, as earlier stated loss of the sense of touch on the right side probably due to hypertension which had been treated and which earlier had resulted in some cerebral vascular problem at an earlier point of lime. Therefore, the medical evidence gathered by the Commissioner and with no evidence offered by the counsel for petitioner-appellant, the Commissioner has no choice but to reject the application as apparently there was no connection between the disease certified and the entry relied upon by the learned counsel in Part-C of Schedule-in of the Workmen's Compensation Act.
5. The appeal is therefore dismissed.