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

1978 Supreme(MP) 161

G.P.SINGH, R.K.TANKHA, J.S.VERMA
YESHWANT RAO – Appellant
Versus
SAMPAT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.L.ISSRANI

G. P. SINGH, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference made by a Division Bench consisting of Hon'ble K. K. Dube, J. and Hon'ble J. P. Bajpai, J. , referring to a Full Bench the following question:

"whether or not a revision would lie to the High Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure from a decision by the commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, deciding a dispute under Section 19 (2) of that Act?"

( 2 ) THE revisional power of the High Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil procedure is available against "any Court subordinate" to it. The important point that arises before us is whether the Commissioner for Workmen's compensation is a Court within Section 115 of the Code.

( 3 ) SECTION 2 (1) (b) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, defines "commissioner" to mean a Commissioner for workmen's compensation appointed under Section 20. The State Government is empowered under section 20 to appoint any person to be a Commissioner for workmen's compensation by a notification for such area as may be specified in the notification. Section 19 (1) provides that if any question arises in any proceedings under the Act as to the liability of any person to pay compensati














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