1. The finding of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation that the notice provision of Code 114-303 had not been complied with by the claimant was authorized by the evidence.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court of Fulton County affirming the award of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation which denied the employee's claim for compensation. The claim was predicated upon the contention of the employee that he had suffered a heart attack on May 19, 1961, which arose out of and in the course of his employment with the defendant company. The deputy director found for the employee and on appeal to the full board the award of the deputy director was reversed, the full board finding that the employee had not given notice of the accident to the defendant employer as required by the provisions of Code 114-303.

The record in this case discloses that the defendant employer did not have knowledge that the claimant had suffered a heart attack during actual working hours so as to put it on notice of any injury arising out of and in the course of employment and the only evidence relating to the giving of notice by the employee to the employer of said heart attack simply disclosed that the claimant's wife, three days after the claimant had last worked for the defendant, informed the employer through its personnel supervisor that her husband was in the hospital suffering from a heart attack. It is manifest that the giving of such information did not constitute notice of an accident arising out of and in the course of employment within the purview of the Coulter case, supra; and there being no other evidence in this regard, the finding of the full board that the notice provision of Code 114-303 had not been complied with was fully authorized. New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. Kidd, 101 Ga. App. 910 (115 SE2d 427); Consolidated Underwriters v. Smith, 106 Ga. App. 167 (126 SE2d 465).

2. The employee offered evidence in this case of his physical and mental incapacity after the sustaining of said heart attack in an attempt to show an exception to the requirement of notice of an accident or a reasonable excuse for failure to give notice under Code 114-303 but the full board made no finding as to this issue. Under the decision of this court in Anderson v. Houston Fire &c. Ins. Co., 104 Ga. App. 680 (122 SE2d 589), the failure of the board to make an affirmative finding as to an exception or excuse is tantamount to a finding that none was proven, and where, as here, the evidence does not demand such a finding, this court will not disturb the order of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation denying compensation. James v. Fite, 38 Ga. App. 759 (145 SE 536).