The parties will be re *410 ferred to as petitioner and respondent. This is an original proceeding to review an award entered on the 7th day of August, 1936, refusing to discontinue compensation made in 'an order of July 2, 1936.

Respondent suffered an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment when he slipped and fell through the floor of a rig on September 8, 1935. Both parties admit that there is hut the one question as to whether there is any competent evidence to sustain the award.

The testimony of the physicians for the petitioner and respondent was in conflict. The physician for the respondent was of the opinion thlat his disability had not ceased, and that he suffered the same disability as at the time of the entry of the former award. We have often had occasion to stlat.e the rule in such case. Davon Oil Co. v. State Industrial Com., 177 Okla. 612, 61 P. (2d) 579; Hubbard Drilling Co. v. Moore, 158 Okla. 130, 12 P. (2d) 897; City of Kingfisher v. Jenkins, 168 Okla. 624, 33 P. (2d) 1094; Standard Roofing & Material Co. v. Mosley, 176 Okla. 517, 56 P. (2d) 847; Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Clow, 163 Okla. 302, 22 P. (2d) 378.

In Eagle-Picher Mining & Smelting Co. v. Linthicum, 168 Okla. 631, 35 P. (2d) 450, we said:

■ "An award of the State Industrial Commission will not be disturbed by this court where there is competent evidence reasonably tending to support the s'ame.”

The award is affirmed.