Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Amin G. Shikalgar, was employed as a Die Maker with the first respondent, Joshi Precision Machines. On 6 February 1979, he sustained an injury to his left eye while working on a tool. He received initial treatment at Lokmanya Hospital, Chinchwad, and subsequently under the ESI Scheme. Over time, he began losing vision in his left eye. The Medical Board examined him on 18 August 1979 and certified that his permanent disability was nil, diagnosing him with Eales's disease, which is unrelated to the injury. Aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal under Section 54-A of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 before the Employees Insurance Court, Pune. The ESI Corporation (respondent no.2) contested the claim, asserting that the loss of vision was due to Eales's disease and not the injury. The lower court framed two issues: whether the appellant proved that the loss of vision was due to the employment injury, and whether he was entitled to a review of the Medical Board's decision. The lower court answered both issues in the negative and dismissed the appeal. The appellant then filed the present first appeal before the Bombay High Court. The High Court heard the matter and noted that the appellant did not examine any medical expert to rebut the Medical Board's finding. The court observed that Eales's disease is a retinal condition and not caused by trauma. The appellant failed to establish any causal link between the injury and the loss of vision. Consequently, the High Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it, upholding the decision of the Employees Insurance Court.
Headnote
A) Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 - Section 54-A - Appeal against Medical Board decision - Burden of proof - The appellant workman claimed that loss of vision of left eye was due to employment injury, but Medical Board certified permanent disability as nil and diagnosed Eales's disease unrelated to injury. The Employees Insurance Court dismissed the appeal. On further appeal, the High Court held that the appellant failed to prove causal connection between injury and loss of vision, and no ground for review of Medical Board decision was made out. (Paras 1-5) B) Evidence - Medical evidence - Expert opinion - The appellant did not examine any doctor to rebut the Medical Board's finding that he suffered from Eales's disease, which is a disease of the retina and not caused by trauma. The High Court upheld the lower court's finding that the loss of vision was not due to the employment injury. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the loss of vision of the appellant's left eye was due to the employment injury sustained on 6-2-1979, and whether the appellant was entitled to review of the Medical Board's decision regarding permanent disability.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The order of the Employees Insurance Court, Pune dated 30-8-1996 is upheld.
Law Points
- burden of proof on claimant to establish causal link between employment injury and disability
- Medical Board's opinion binding unless challenged with expert evidence
- no review of Medical Board decision without fresh medical evidence
