ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Reliance General Insurance Company – Appellant
Versus
Radharaman – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. A challenge in the instant misc. appeal has been made to the impugned judgment and award dated 27.03.2017 passed by the Court of learned Commissioner Workmen's Compensation, Bharatpur (for short 'the learned Commissioner') in claim case No. E.C.A. (N.F.)/D-47/2011 by which the claim petition filed by the claimant-respondent has been allowed and the Insurance company has been directed to pay compensation of Rs. 3,99,322/- to the claimant-respondent with interest.
2. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal on the ground that there is no existence of relationship of employee and employer between the injured and the insured. Counsel further submits that the driver of the vehicle was not having a valid license. Hence, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any amount of compensation of the claimant-respondent.
3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the claimant- respondent opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the appellant and submits that finding of facts have been recorded by the learned Commissioner while passing the award after appreciating the evidence available on the record. Counsel further
Golla Rajanna Etc. vs. The Divisional Manager And Anr." reported in 2017(1) SCC 45
M/s Krishna Weaving Mills, Ajmer Vs. Smt. Chandra Bhaga Devi wide of Mool Chand & Anr."
North East Karnatka Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Sujatha" reported in 2019 (11) SCC 514
Limited jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act to examine substantial questions of law only.
The main legal point established is the limited jurisdiction of the High Court to examine substantial questions of law under the Workmen's Compensation Act, emphasizing the finality of the Commission....
The limited jurisdiction of the High Court to examine substantial questions of law only and not to reappreciate evidence or findings of fact.
The appellate jurisdiction of the High Court is confined only to examine the substantial questions of law arising in the case, as provided under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
Limited jurisdiction of the High Court in appeals under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
The High Court's jurisdiction under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act is limited to substantial questions of law, preventing re-appreciation of evidence or disturbance of factual findings.
The appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act is confined to substantial questions of law, prohibiting re-evaluation of factual findings.
The High Court's jurisdiction under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act is limited to substantial questions of law, and it cannot re-appreciate evidence or disturb factual findings.
The judgment established the principle that the High Court's jurisdiction under the Workmen's Compensation Act is confined to examining substantial questions of law only.
The limited jurisdiction of the High Court to examine substantial questions of law only under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.