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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3337

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.Sounthar, J
Kumar – Appellant
Versus
M.Deepan – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.C.Kulanthaivel
For the Respondent: Dr.C.Paranthaman

JUDGMENT :

S.Sounthar, J.

Not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Employee's Compensation Commissioner, Coonoor, the appellant/claimant has come by way of this appeal.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company.

3. Since the 1st respondent was set exparte before the Employee's Compensation Commissioner, notice to the 1st respondent was dispensed with.

4. It is the case of the appellant/workman, he was employed as a Loadman under 1st respondent. When he was unloading cut plam trees loaded in a Lorry bearing Registration No.TN 30 R 0538, he sustained injury and suffered fracture in his neck, fracture in left side ribs, fracture in right acetabulum and head injury. The workman was initially treated with first aid in Government Hospital, Andhiyur and then, he was taken to Trust Hospital, Erode and then to Ganga Medical Centre and Hospital (P) Ltd., Coimbatore. The lorry was insured with the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company. The injured/workman was aged about 36 years on the date of accident. It was claimed by the appellant/claimant that he was earning a sum of Rs.12,000/-

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