Back
NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
United India Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Hardeva Ram S/o Mangla Ram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the appellant- Insurance Company (for short ‘the Insurance Company’) u/s 30 of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (for short, the Act of 1923) against the judgment dated 13.01.2015 passed by learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Sikar (for short ‘learned Commissioner’) in claim case No.WCCF/NF/27/2007 titled as Hardeva Ram Vs. Harphool Singh & Anr., whereby an amount of Rs.2,36,472/- with interest @ 12% has been awarded in favour of the claimant-respondent No.1 (for short ‘the claimant’) with effect from the date of accident i.e. 01.02.2007.
2. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the learned Commissioner has wrongly allowed the claim petition filed by the claimant. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company also submits that no FIR was lodged regarding accident dated 01.02.2007 for two months. Rather, the claimant submitted an application after a lapse of more than 2 months, on which no investigation was conducted by the police. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company also submits that claimant had not submitted any evidence regarding income. Claimant was not a regular labourer and works as per the daily r
Limited jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, allows appeals only on substantial questions of law.
The limited jurisdiction of the High Court to examine substantial questions of law only and not to reappreciate evidence or findings of fact.
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 appeal under the Workmen Compensation Act is confined to substantial questions of law, and factual findings by the Commissioner are generally conclusive.
The High Court's review under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act is confined to substantial questions of law, not factual re-evaluations.
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.
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 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.
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
