Back
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
P. Sam Koshy, J.
Insurance Company – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner for Employee's Compensation - cum - Labour Court – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the key facts surrounding the appeal and the deceased's employment. (Para 1 , 3 , 6 , 12) |
| 2. key legal provisions regarding compensation and requirements. (Para 4 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. arguments and counterarguments regarding the nature of the deceased's death. (Para 5 , 7 , 15) |
| 4. court's reasoning against the claimed compensation. (Para 13 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. final ruling regarding the appeal and award. (Para 18) |
1. The present is an appeal by the insurance company under S.30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923. The challenge is to the award dated 25.10.2016 passed by the Commissioner for Employee's Compensation - cum - Labour Court, Bilaspur in Case No. 184 / ECAct / 2006 - Fatal. Vide the impugned order the Commissioner has awarded compensation of Rs. 4,92,650 with interest at 12 per cent per annum. The liability of payment of compensation has been fastened upon the insurance company which had insured the Trailer (truck) bearing registration No. CG 10 - G 1341 owned by respondent No. 5. The deceased - Beerbal Das Manikpuri, at the time of accident, was aged around 35 years and he was basically a driver working with respondent No. 5. It is said that in the course of his emp
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
