Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S. MANU, J
MARY KUTTY – Appellant
Versus
SUBRAN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishment of worker's compensation claim due to injury. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. analysis of compensation granted by the commissioner. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's evaluation of the justification for compensation amount. (Para 5 , 6 , 9) |
| 4. discussion on liability and indemnification under the act. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. final refixation of compensation and appeal disposition. (Para 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT
Appellants are the 1st and 2nd opposite parties in ECC No.102/17 on the files of the Court of the Employees Compensation Commissioner (Industrial Tribunal), Thrissur. The 1st respondent filed an application claiming compensation under Section 22 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 , on account of permanent partial disability suffered as a result of an accident arising out of and in the course of employment in an establishment of the appellants.
2. The 1st respondent contended before the Commissioner that he was employed by the appellants as well as the 2nd respondent as a Tile Pressing Machine Operator in ‘Sun- Ceramics’ tile factory owned by the 1st appellant and managed by the 2nd appellant. The case of the 1st respondent was that he was engaged through the 2nd respondent/3r
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
