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

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Saroj Gautam – Respondent


Table of Content
1. factual basis for compensation claim. (Para 1 , 2)
2. contestation of employer-employee relationship. (Para 3 , 4)
3. legal standards for appeals under the act. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. ruling upholding compensation order. (Para 12 , 13)

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. The appellant has preferred the present appeal under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter, referred to as the `Act'), assailing the order dated 16.04.2018 passed by the learned Commissioner, Employees' Compensation in Case No.CEC-D/NE/18/2017/1125-1127, whereby death compensation was awarded to respondent Nos.1 and 2/claimants and the appellant directed to deposit Rs.8,90,840/- alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. with effect from 19.07.2017 till realization.

2. Brief facts, as emerge from the records, are that respondent Nos.1 and 2 had filed a petition under Section 22 of the Act, claiming compensation on account of death of their son/Nitish Gautam. As per the averments, Nitish Gautam, aged 20 years, was employed as a driver with respondent No.3 on the latter's car bearing No. DL 7CM 0135 and was drawing wages @ Rs.12,000/- per month. The car was insured with the app

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