Back
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
Prashant Kumar Mishra, J
Mahrin Bai and Another v. Santosh Sahu and Another
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishment of the claimants and the context of the accident. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding interest and penalties under compensation law. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's interpretation of relevant laws regarding compensation and interest. (Para 10 , 12 , 19) |
| 4. importance of adhering to insurance conditions pertaining to licenses. (Para 11 , 14 , 18) |
| 5. final judgment on compensation and interest. (Para 20 , 21) |
1. This appeal is filed under S.30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923, challenging the judgment / award dated 2.7.2013 passed by the Commissioner, Employee's Compensation, Labour Court, Raipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner') in Case No. 113 / WC Act / 2012 (F), whereby the Commissioner awarded a total sum of Rs. 4,48,000 as compensation.
2. Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that Mahesh Baghel (now deceased), who was son of appellants - claimants, was employed with the respondent No. 1 as driver of the vehicle Tata Ace bearing registration No. CG 04 - JB 4217. On 20.5.2009 when deceased Mahesh Baghel was on his duty, some dacoits after murdering him looted the vehicle. The incident was reported to concerned police stat
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
