' This appeal arises from the decision dated 16th December, 1980 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Gujrat, whereby the respondent was granted Rs, 21,000 as compensation for the injuries caused to his both knees, as a result of an accident which took place on 22nd April, 1978 while he was on duty.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the respondent was not entitled to any compensation as he did not in compliance to the order Exh. R. 2 of the Commissioner for Workmen, get himself examined from the Railways' doctor. He says that no doubt report dated 27th July, 1978 is of the Medical Board of the Railway but the appellant got the respondent examined by the Board and not that the respondent himself appeared before the Board in compliance with the order Exh.
R. 2 of the learned Commissioner. This argument is ex facie fallacious. Since ultimately the respondent was examined by the Railways Medical Board, it is immaterial if the appellant got him examined and the respondent did not of his own accord appear before the Board. Unless the Board had been constituted he could not have appeared before any such Board. As soon as the board was got constituted by the appellant and the respondent was asked to appear before it, he complied with the direction.
3. The report of the Board dated 27th July, 1978 is that the respondent had been rendered completely and permanently incapacitated for further service of any kind. It was thus a total permanent disablement. So the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation rightly allowed the maximum compensation of Rs, 21,000.
4. As upshot of the discussion made above, I do not find any force in the appeal and dismiss it.