SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(SC) 920

KURIAN JOSEPH, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. – Appellant
Versus
Divisional Manager & Another, Etc. Etc. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Kurian, J.

Leave granted.

2. The appellants are aggrieved by the order passed by the High Court whereby the compensation awarded to them has been drastically reduced. The High Court re-appreciated the evidence and substituted its own views with that of the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner and made a fresh assesment.

3. By order dated 16.02.2009, the Labour Officer cum Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Division No. II, Bellary passed the following order:

“In considering the employment of the petitioners, documents produced before the court and the evidence of the doctor, considering the disablement decided by the doctor, and considering that the respondent No.2, failed to prove the allegations denied by the respondent No.2, I decide that the petitioner No.1 has suffered 35% of the disablement, the second petitioner has suffered 35% of the disablement, the third petitioner has suffered 35% of disablement, the 4th and 5th petitioners have suffered 40% of disablement each and 6th petitioner has suffered 35% of the disablement with subsequent loss of earnings and decided the above issue No.1 in favour of the petitioners.”

4. Accordingly, the appellants were awarded the compensa




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top