Back
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
United India Insurance Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Hari Lal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Ohri, J.
CM APPL. 8750/2021 (Delay)
1. The present application has been filed under Section 30(2) & (3) of Employees Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter, referred to as `the Act') read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 62 days in filing the appeal.
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 62 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
3. The application is disposed of.
FAO 96/2021 and CM APPL. 8748/2021 (stay)
4. By way of present appeal filed under Section 30 of the Act, the appellant has assailed the order dated 20.11.2019 passed by the learned Commissioner in Case No. 16/CEC/NSS/2018/7492-7494 whereby the claim application filed on behalf of the respondents was allowed and the compensation amount was awarded.
5. The brief facts as noted in the impugned order are that the claimants being the parents of the deceased Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar filed a claim application thereby claiming that Ranjit Kumar was employed as a driver with respondent No.3/Sh. Amit Kumar on vehicle bearing No. DL- IGC-3944. On 05.04.2018, while the vehicle was being driven by the dece
The legal principle established in the judgment emphasizes the limited scope of interference in appeals under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act and the importance of evidence in establishi....
The court emphasized the need for evidence to prove material issues in a claim petition and the limited scope of interference in an appeal under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923.
The limited scope of interference in an appeal filed under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act and the requirement for substantial questions of law to be involved.
The appellate jurisdiction of the High Court in an appeal under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act is confined only to examine substantial questions of law, and findings of fact proved eit....
The scope of interference in an appeal under the Employees' Compensation Act is limited to substantial questions of law, and findings of fact proved either way are not likely to be interfered with.
The appellate jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 30 of the Act is confined only to examine substantial questions of law, and findings of facts proved either way are not to be likely interfe....
The court affirmed that the employer-employee relationship is crucial for compensation claims under the Employee’s Compensation Act, including for casual workers post-amendment.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of disputed liability, the party should be granted an opportunity to lead evidence and cross-examine to prevent a miscarriage of j....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
