Dismissed

H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Kavita Sharma and 4 Others

Allahabad HC29 Sept 2022FAFO/478/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This first appeal challenged a compensation award under the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923. The appellant argued the Commissioner wrongly relied on post mortem age instead of the claim petition. The court held that without proof, the post mortem age was correct, found no substantial question of law, and dismissed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 is dismissed for lack of merit.

H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt… — Company and Corporate | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 5

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 478 of 2020

¶3

Appellant :- H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Respondent :- Smt. Kavita Sharma And 4 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Mehrotra Counsel for Respondent :- Pradip Kumar Shukla,Amit Kumar Sinha,Deepali Srivastava Sinha,Sanjay Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶5

List has been revised. Sri Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents is not present.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

¶7

The present appeal under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 has been filed against the award dated 18.12.2019 passed by the Commissioner, Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 and Assistant Labour Commissioner, Kanpur Region, Kanpur in E.C. case No.06 of 2019, whereby the Commissioner has awarded Rs.7,98,170/- as compensation to the claimants-appellants for the death of one Sunil Sharma in an accident which had taken place on 19.10.2018 with tanker no.HR55K/6169.

¶8

Only contention advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that in the claim petition, the claimantrespondent no.1 has stated that at the time of accident, the age of the deceased was 32 years whereas the Commissioner ignoring the age stated by the claimantrespondent no.1 in the claim petition has assessed the compensation on the basis of age of the deceased mentioned in the post mortem report. Accordingly, it is

¶9

contended that the Commissioner has erred in applying the factor applicable to age of 30 years instead of 32 years. Be that as it may, the appeal under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act is maintainable on substantial question of law. The Commissioner on the basis of age mentioned in the post mortem report has applied factor applicable to age of 30 years.

¶10

This Court finds that as no age proof had been produced, therefore, age mentioned in post mortem has rightly been taken by the Commissioner, therefore, the finding of the Commissioner cannot be interfered on the ground of perversity. In such view of fact, this Court finds that there is no substantial question of law involved in the appeal. Accoringly, the appeal lacks merit and is dismissed . Order Date :- 29.9.2022 SS

¶11

Digitally signed by SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2022.10.17 17:45:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Kavita Sharma and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Kavita Sharma and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Area Manager Legal Chola Mandalam M.S General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Ravindra Patel and Another

Anuj Kumar Saxena Vs the Oriental Insurance Co. and 2 Others

Shreepal and 3 Others Vs Ompal Fauji and 2 Others

Multan Singh Vs State Bank of India and Others

Sri Firasat Khan and Another Vs Orintal Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another

Ram Dhara Vs Ayub and 2 Others