Back
NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
United India Insurance Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Amar Lal, S/o. Late Sh. Devi Lal – 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 01.03.2017 passed by learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Kota in claim case No. JLC/F/18/2016 titled as Amar Lal & Anr. Vs. Shammirai & Anr., whereby learned Commissioner has awarded a sum of Rs.6,64,110/- alongwith interest @ 12% P.A. from the date of accident in favour of the claimants-respondents No.1 and 2 (for short ‘the claimants’).
2. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that learned Commissioner wrongly allowed the claim petition filed by the claimants. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company also submits that no documentary evidence was placed on record to the effect that in the night time, deceased was working under employment, nor going for bringing food for driver falls under employment. The cause of murder is not at all related to the employment. So, appeal be allowed and judgment dated 01.03.2017 passed by learned Commissioner be set aside.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the claimants submits that
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 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, 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, and it cannot re-appreciate evidence or disturb factual findings.
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.
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, 1923, allows appeals only on substantial questions of law.
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.
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
