Back
NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
United India Insurance Company Sikar – Appellant
Versus
Gulabi Devi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Narendra Singh Dhaddha, J.
1. This Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the appellant- Insurance Company (for short 'the Insurance Company') under section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short, the Act of 1923) against the judgment dated 24.11.2014 passed by learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Sikar in claim case No. WCC/F/44/2011 titled as Smt. Gulabi Devi & Ors. v. Gulzari Lal & Anr., whereby an amount of Rs. 6,39,200/- and Rs. 5,000/- as funeral expenses with interest @ 9% from the date of filing the claim petition has been awarded in favour of the claimants-respondents (for short 'the claimants') and against the Insurance Company and in case the compensation is not paid within 30 days, the amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 12% per annum.
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 there is no evidence that deceased was earning Rs. 8,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that as per FIR, the deceased was travelling in the offending truck as a passenger and was
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, 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, 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.
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 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....
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
