The court is examining whether the mandatory deposit requirement under the 3rd proviso to Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, is a prerequisite for the maintainability of an appeal at the time of filing.

Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/1423/2026

SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

JUNCTION OF WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY AND ANDHERI KURLA ROAD

ANDHERI (EAST)

MUMBAI-400069 REGIONAL OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR

B BLOCK

APEEJAY HOUSE

15 PARK STREET

KOLKATA-7000016 AND BRANCH OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR

LAKSHMI DARSHAN BUILDING

OPPOSITE BORA SERVICE

G.S. ROAD

ULUBARI

GUWAHATI-781007

ASSAM.

VERSUS

JINAMONI HAZARIKA NATH AND ORS

W/O. LT. GYANDIP NATH

2:NAYANDEEP NATH

S/O. LT. GYANDIP NATH

3:DICHANI NATH

D/O. LT. GYANDIP NATH

ALL ARE R/O. VILL.- HAUTOLEY NATH GAON

P/O. MELAMORA

P/S. KAMARGAON

DIST. GOLAGHAT

ASSAM

PIN-785702

RESPONDENT NO. 2 AND 3 BEING MINORS ARE REP. BY HER KEGAL GUARDIAN MOTHER I.E. RESPONDENT NO. 1

4:MONJU HAZARIKA

S/O. SRI KHAGEN HAZARIKA

R/O.VILL.- MELAMORA GAON

P/O. MELAMORA

P/S. KAMARGAON

DIST. GOLAGHAT

ASSAM

PIN-785702

5:BIBI NATH

W/O. SRI DIMDESWAR NATH

R/O. VILL.- HAUTOLEY NATH GAON

P/O. MELAMORA

P/S. KAMARGAON

DIST. GOLAGHAT

ASSAM

PIN-785702.

------------

Advocate for : MONDAKINI SAIKIA

Advocate for : MR. M DUTTA appearing for JINAMONI HAZARIKA NATH AND ORS

BEFORE

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

ORDER

11.05.2026

Date : --

Heard Mr. R. Goswami, the learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. M. Dutta, the learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This appeal under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 has been preferred by the appellant, namely SBI General Insurance Company Limited, impugning the Judgment & Order dated 24.03.2025, passed by the Commissioner, Employees' Compensation, Golaghat, in Employees in E.C. Case No.5/2024.

3. The Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that as per 3rd proviso to Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, no appeal shall lie unless the memorandum of appeal is accompanied by a certificate by the commissioner to the effect that the appellant has deposited the amount payable under the order appealed against.

4. On this, Mr. R. Goswami, the learned counsel for the appellant, submits that there is a judgment of this court which says that such deposit need not to be made while filing the appeal. He also submits that the judgment of the High Court has also been affirmed by another judgment of the Apex Court. He seeks some time to place the judgment before this court.

5. The prayer is allowed.

6. Let this matter be listed again on 19.05.2026.