' Both the appeals are directed against the decision dated 11th February, 1981 passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Rawalpindi, whereby Rs, 5,000 were fixed as compensation for the loss of right hand of Muhammad Zarat. Muhammad Amin Sheikh, Proprietor, Capital Wood Seasoning Industry, Islamabad has challenged the order of awarding Rs, 5,000 as compensation. According to Muhammad Amin, Muhammad Zarat is not entitled to any more compensation as the former had already borne the expenses of the latter's treatment. Muhammad Zarat has challenged the quantum of compensation to be inadequate, He claims Rs, 18,000. As both the appeals arise from the same order, they are being disposed of together by this single judgment.
2. The case of the employer is that the employees in the Capital Wood Seasoning Industry are only 8, therefore, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 is not applicable and the learned Commissioner had no jurisdiction in the matter. The accident and the loss of arm of Muhammad Zarat, are admitted. So far as the dispute about the pay of Muhammad Zarat is concerned, the statement of Muhammad Zarat is that his pay was Rs, 600, whereas Muhammad Amin Sheikh, Proprietor, stated that his pay was Rs, 400. The khata was with Muhammad Amin Sheikh and it was his duty to produce it before the Court in support of his statement that the pay of Muhammad Zarat was Rs,
400. So far as the number of employees is concerned, here also I would say that from the record it could be proved that the number of employees was less than ten. Muhammad Zarat has said that at the time of the accident the number of employees was 25.
3. The learned counsel for the employer has argued that the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Rawalpindi had no territorial jurisdiction, inasmuch as the factory is situated in Islamabad, for which area a special Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation has been appointed. Ordinance XVIII of 1980 was promulgated whereby the area of Islamabad was separated from Rawalpindi. Under notification No, 4/1/18-AFT dated 15th January, 1981. Assistant Director Labour Welfare was authorised to act as Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act for Islamabad. The impugned order was passed on 11th February, 1981, meaning that at that time the Commissioner for Workmen's-Compensation, Rawalpindi had no territorial jurisdiction. The objection regarding territorial jurisdiction is not very material after the decision of the case. The respondent submitted to the jurisdiction of Court and did not raise timely objection before it. When the case was decided against the respondent, it came forward with such an objection. But there is a serious defect in this case for which it is necessary to remand the case. The doctor, who examined Muhammad Zarat and issued certificate regarding his disablement, was not examined as a witness, meaning that the certificate was not proved, nor the employer had opportunity to cross examine the doctor upon his opinion. It was observed in NLR 19781 Labour 360 that recording of evidence of medical witness was mandatory.
4. For the reasons given above, I accept both the appeals and setting aside the impugned order of the learned Commissioner, remand the case with a direction that the evidence of the doctor, who examined Muhammad Zarat and issued certificate regarding his disablement, should, be recorded and the case be redefined in the light of his testimony. As1 the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Rawalpindi has no territorial jurisdiction to hear this case, the case is sent to the Assistant Director Labour Welfare, Islamabad, capital territory district, with the powers of Workmen's Compensation Commissioner. The parties will be at liberty to produce documentary evidence on the point as to what was the pay of Muhammad Zarat and what is the number of employees in the industry, where Muhammad Zarat was employed.