1. DECISION ' This is an appeal against the order of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, West Division, Karachi.
2. ' The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants "Naveed Garments Industries" were running a Garment Factory in S.I.T.E., Karachi, employing about 300 workers. On 22-6-1990 one of the workers Farhat Hussain s/o Fayyaz Hussain died in the course of employment. He was said to be working in the Weaving Department and he contacted T.B. Of the lungs and died without any treatment. The widow Mst. Siddiqa Begum and her three sons applied for compensation dues and Group Insurance of the deceased. The learned Commissioner recorded the evidence of the widow and her witnesses but the respondents did not produce any defence evidence either oral or documentary. The learned Lower Court found that the relationship of employer and employee existed between the parties and that S.O. 10-B of the Standing Orders Ordinance was applicable. He also found that the application was maintainable and the applicants were entitled to the dues payable to the deceased. He accordingly awarded Rs,30,000 as compensation and Group Insurance and Rs,54,570 as the dues and directed the respondent to deposit the said amount.
2. I have heard Mr. Khurshid Ahmed Siddiqui on behalf of Naveed Impex (Garment Industries Karachi). He has denied that there was any Garment Factory in existence at that time or now. He has also denied that deceased Farhat Hussain was an employee in his factory. Lastly he has denied that his factory if it existed, employed 50 or more workers and asserted that he was not therfore liable for payment of Group Insurance. He has not produced any oral or documentary evidence, even at this stage. He has merely made these assertions without supporting them by any proof. Even the record of the workers in the factory has not been produced at the appellate stage.
3. The respondent Mst. Siddiqa Begum and her three sons have become untraceable and they cannot be found in spite of publication of notice.
4. ' Under the circumstances it will not be fair to alter the decision of the lower Court merely on the assertion of the counsel for the appellants. I find no substance in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.