Back
NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Mota Ram, S/o. Shri Uma Ram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Narendra Singh Dhaddha, J.
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 13.04.2017 passed by learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Sikar (Camp Alwar) in claim case No. E.C.C./N.F. 01/2014 titled as Mota Ram Vs. Sharwan Ram & Ors., whereby learned Commissioner has awarded a sum of Rs.3,26,331/- alongwith interest @ 12% P.A. from the date of incident in favour of the claimant-respondent No.1 (for short ‘the claimant’).
2. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that learned Commissioner wrongly allowed the claim petition filed by the claimant. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company also submits that there was no existence of relationship of employee and employer between the claimant and owner of the offending vehicle. Learned counsel for the Insurance company also submits that insurance policy was issued only for the purpose of covering the risk of driver alone and the kutti machine attached thereto was neither registered nor insured with the Insurance Company. Hence, the Insurance Company cann
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-evaluate 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.
The High Court's jurisdiction under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act is limited to substantial questions of law; it cannot re-evaluate evidence or disturb findings unless they are pervers....
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 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....
Limited jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act to examine substantial questions of law only.
The limited jurisdiction of the High Court to examine substantial questions of law only and not to reappreciate evidence or findings of fact.
The High Court's jurisdiction in appeals under the Workmen Compensation Act is limited to substantial questions of law, and it cannot re-evaluate evidence or findings of fact.
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
