SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(HP) 203

KULDIP SINGH
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER – Appellant
Versus
AMBIKA SHARMA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. M.L. Chauhan, Additional Advocate General, for the Appellants; Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Kuldip Singh, J.—The above appeal has been admitted on following substantial questions of law:— (i) Whether the respondent Ambika Charan Sharma who was working as J.E. (Electric) at the time of accident is a workmen covered by the definition under the Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 as amended I from time to time? (ii) Whether the order of the Commissioner below is illegal on the grounds that the Commissioner had applied multiplier of Amended Act, 2000 for assessing the amount of compensation whereas the accident had occurred prior to Amended Act?

2. The facts, in brief, are that applicant Ambika Sharma, J.E. (E) Electrical Sub Division, H.P. P.W.D., Snow don, Shimla, met with an accident on 6.11.2000 while performing his duties on LT Panel. A non-fatal accident report was submitted by the Executive Engineer, Electric Division No. 2, H.P.P.W.D. Shimla-1 vide his letter dated 1.12.2000 informing the Commissioner about the accident. A notice was issued to the respondents and to submit requisite documents as well as their reply.

3. The further facts are that when applicant and others were working on LT Panel on 6.11.2000, they got Electric Sub Station shut down for conducting n











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top