' This is an appeal preferred under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act against the decision dated 4-3-1986 delivered by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Lahore.
2. Previously the case was remanded for the examination of the doctor who had issued the certificate Exh. P-3. Not the same doctor but some other doctor has been examined. The appellant claimed compensation on account of an accident alleged to have been met by the appellant arising out of and in the course of his employment. He had during the accident received injuries on the right clavicle and some ribs. The learned Commissioner has rightly found that certificate Exh. P- 3 is tampered with. Columns Nos. 7 and 8 were originally left blank by drawing small line denoting that entries were 'Nil'. Afterwards with different pen and ink entries were made in the said columns.
Dr. TalibHussain, who had brought the record, deposed in answer to cross-examination that whatever was written in columns 7 and 8 of Exh. P-3 was not present in the record. Column No, 11 was filled in by the doctor while signing the document. In the said column it is said that there was no disability. Clause No, 7, which bears entries with different ink and pen suggests that loss of earning capacity was 60 per cent. Column No, 8 bears entries with different ink and suggests that 'working capacity' will be less than before. The entries are discrepant from the entry made in Column No, 11 which suggests that there was no disability. It is thus clear that Exh. P-3 is a tampered-with-document and thus cannot be relied upon. The learned Commissioner therefore has rightly discarded the said documentary evidence. As the appellant did not suffer from any disability as mentioned in column No, 11 of Exh. P-3, he is not entitled to any compensation. His petition, therefore, has been rightly dismissed.