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

2010 Supreme(All) 3401

SUDHANSHU DHULIA
Subhash Chandra – Appellant
Versus
Ram Prasad Dhiman and another – Respondent


Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral):-

Head learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for respondent no. 2.

2. This appeal from order has been filed under Section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 against an or­der passed by the Assistant Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Muzaffamagar, where the alleged accident also took place at Muzaffamagar. How­ever, since the workman was residing at Roorkee in the cost title the district was mentioned as Haridwar.

3. Not satisfied with the order of the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Muzaffamagar, this appeal was filed by the appellant before the High Court of Ju­dicature at Allahabad prior to the ap­pointed day i.e. prior to November 9, 2000. After the creation of the new State of Uttarakhand, the matter has been transferred to this Court under Section 35 of the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000. Section 35 of the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000 reads as follows:

"35. Transfer of proceedings from Allahabad High Court to Uttaranchal High Court.-(1) Ex­cept as hereinafter provided, the High Court at Allahabad shall, as from the appointed day, have no jurisdiction in respect of the transferred territory.

(2) Such proceedings pending in







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