Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR
Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Mohari Devi w/o Shri Bhagirath – Respondent
JUDGEMENT :
PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR, J.
1. The appellant Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd has preferred the present appeal under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) assailing the award dated 22.5.2017 passed by Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Jaipur District-II, Jaipur in Claim Case No. ECCF 39/2010 whereby death compensation was awarded to respondent No.1, directing the appellant Insurance Company to pay Rs. 4,19,840/- along with interest @ 12% per annum w.e.f. 11.9.2009 till realisation.
2. Brief facts, as apparent from the record, are that claimant/respondent Smt. Mohari Devi filed a claim petition under “the Act” claiming compensation on account of death of his son Sharwanlal. As per the averments deceased Sharwanlal was working as a Driver of Vehicle No. RJ-14-GB-8298 in the employment of non-claimant/respondent Ram Karan Yadav. On 11.8.2009, the said vehicle was carrying goods from Udaipur to Neemrana. At Pooja Hotel near Chandwaji, above truck collided with another truck from behind and Sharwanlal sustained injuries and succumbed to the same. The death occurred during the course of employment. The above truck was insured
The appeal under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act is limited to substantial questions of law, and findings of fact by the Commissioner are not to be interfered with.
Limited jurisdiction of the High Court in appeals under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
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 in the judgment is the limited scope of appeal to substantial questions of law under Section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923.
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 limited jurisdiction of the High Court to examine substantial questions of law only and not to reappreciate evidence or findings of fact.
Limited jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act to examine substantial questions of law only.
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 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 appellate jurisdiction of the High Court is confined only to examine substantial questions of law, and cannot reappreciate the evidence and finding of fact recorded on the evidence led by both th....
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
