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

1955 Supreme(HP) 29

RAMABHADRAN
Sada Ram – Appellant
Versus
Chhotu Ram – Respondent


Advocates:
M.L. Sud for Appellants; H.C. Anand, for Respondent.

JUDGMENT :- In this appeal by two employers against an order awarding compensation by the Commissioner under the Workmens Compensation Act, Bilaspur, learned counsel for the workman-respondent urged, at the hearing on 20-12-55 that the appeal was incompetent, because the amount of compensation was deposited with the Commissioner, after the expiry of the period of limitation for filing an appeal.

2. In answer to that objection, an application under S. 5 of the Limitation Act, accompanied by an affidavit, was put in on behalf of the appellants soon afterwards. A further affidavit was filed on the 21st instant by Bhagat Ram, appellant. A reply to the application was filed by the respondent yesterday.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and, in my opinion, for reasons to be stated shortly, no case is made out for condoning the delay in depositing the amount of compensation with the Commissioner and since the deposit was made after the expiry of the period of limitation for appeal, the appeal cannot be entertained.

4. The following dates are significant. The order under appeal was passed by the Commissioner Workmens Compensation, Bilaspur, on 16-3-1955. Under S. 30(2), Workmens





















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