JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. R. Goswami, the learned counsel for the appellant.

None appears for call for the sole respondent.

2. It may be mentioned that as per order dated 20.09.2023, the learned amicus curiae appointed by this Court for the respondent was not present when the matter was called and therefore, another learned amicus curiae was appointed. However, as indicated herein before, none appears for the respondent on call. Thus, as this appeal was filed on 02.11.2010 and admitted for hearing by order dated 23.05.2011, the Court by recording the above in the order dated 30.11.2023, proceeded to hear the learned counsel for the appellant as only question of law is involved in this appeal. It may be mentioned that the name of respondent no.2, the owner of the vehicle was struck-off by order dated 22.06.2016.

3. This appeal under section 30 of the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 is directed against the order and award dated 09.07.2010, passed by the learned Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation, Golaghat in W.C. Case No. 60/2008, thereby awarding a sum of Rs.4,99,152.00 (Rupees Four lakh ninety nine thousand one hundred fifty two only) in favour of the respondent by directing the appella