Dismissed

E.S.I. Corp. Kanpur v. Ram Naresh

Allahabad HC29 Sept 2022FAFO/35/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge High Court dismissed the first appeal by E.S.I. Corp. Kanpur. Upholding the Commissioner's order, the court held that the finding regarding the insured person's disability is a question of fact that is not perverse. Appeal dismissed; substantial questions of law answered against the appellant. Claimant to receive amounts forthwith.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed. Show called questions of law framed by the Insurance Company are answered against it.

E.S.I. Corp. Kanpur Vs Ram Naresh — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 35 of 2001

¶3

Appellant :- E.S.I. Corp. Kanpur Respondent :- Ram Naresh

¶4

Counsel for Appellant :- Saral Srivastava,Pradeep Kumar Singh,Rajesh Tewari Counsel for Respondent :- A.K.Sachan

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant.

¶7

Without adverting to the facts, it is clear that the order of the learned Commissioner, E.I. Court is challenged, challenging the disability of the insured person. This fact is a question of fact, the finding of fact is neither perverse nor explicable. It is an admitted position of fact that there was employment injury. The factor applied cannot be said to be such which is said to be perverse. Injuries were assessed by the E.I. Court. The claim petition was allowed and injured has been disabled which would reduce his working capacity. These are the questions of facts. Order of the E.I Court does not spell out any perversity.

¶8

Recently the Apex Court in the judgment in Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. Vs. Divisional Manager and Another, 2017 (1) TAC 259 (SC) and later on in Civil Appeal No.7470 of 2009 North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Sujatha decided on 2.11.2018 wherein it has been held that under Section 30, the High Court cannot enter into the arena of facts unless they are proved to be perverse.

¶9

In this matter learned Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant though has vehemently submitted is not been able to show that the finding is perverse.

¶10

In that view of the matter, this Court even supported in its view in the judgment of the Apex Court in Oriental Insurance Company Vs. Siby George and Others, 2012 (4) T.A.C. 4 (S.C.) and the F.A.F.O No. 2748 of 2019 dated 15.10.2019.

¶11

In view of the above, the appeal fails and is dismissed. The show called questions of law framed by the Insurance Company are answered against it. In fact the substantial questions of law raised are the questions of fact.

¶12

This Court 22is thankful to Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant for ably assisting this Court.

¶13

Interim relief, if any, shall stand vacated forthwith. The amount be disbursed to the claimant forthwith.

¶14

Order Date :- 29.9.2022/PS

¶15

Digitally signed by POOJA SHARMA Date: 2022.10.01 16:27:59 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

E.S.I. Corp. Kanpur v. Ram Naresh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.S.I. Corp. Kanpur v. Ram Naresh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rizwan Khan Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Otehrs

E.S.I. Corp. Vs Surendra Kumar Dixit

Employee State Insurence Corp. Vs Iqbal Shanker

Employees State Insurance Corprn.Thru Its Regional Director Vs Shaqoor Kanpur