A miscellaneous appeal filed by the National Insurance Company Ltd. against the award of the Labour Court Commissioner regarding workmen compensation for an accident sustained by a labourer. The High Court examined the records and the commissioner's findings.
The Miscellaneous Appeal was rejected. No order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I N THE HGHI COURT OF CHHA‘SGAR,T’IIH BLURIASP
MISC. APPEAL E‘IOa j‘,’é /2QQ3> ‘ NISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SLC'L‘ION 3O OF IL-IE WORKI’EN OMPbbEATION ACT1°23 Appellant ‘ NAUL‘IONAL INSURANCE COMPANY ETD ‘ ” __1ngutc¢ Bhutani Complex, G.E.‘ Roaa,’ ~ Dower House, Bhllal, through the National Insurance Cowpany Lt§., Bllasgaur. -VS— Gangaram, s/o Chaitu Thakur, age§ about 40 years, . resrlent of Shanta. Nagar, Dandera, Poat D urwera, Tahsll & Dlstrlct Durg ‘i mxgmcx aalsh Babu, Petty Contractor, , hrough S Ix. Jaln, Contractor, Ehl lal S+eel Plant, S P.No.3. lm ront of Selo Gate, Canteen Line, Bhilai Steel Planfti, hi lai, Distt. Durg;(C!;.)§'.G ‘ ' S Ix. Jaln, Contractor, Bhllai St eel Plant, S P.wo.3., En Froht of Selo Gate, Canteen Line, n’“ Bhl lal Steel Plapt, Bhilah ' l stt Burg (C G) \Gen eral Manager, ‘llalBh Steel Plant, Bhl lal, Distt. Burg (c G) Dv1510nal1 l‘anagerr Blaat Hurnace No 4, Bhllal Steel Plant, Bblla l, A C Dlstt. Durg (c G) ) ‘ l 1 BEIWG AGGRIEVWD AGAINST THE AWARD PASSED BY THE C OL IMISS EONER WORKMEN COMPENsATION, WOURCOUm, DURG 1 ' IZOGO‘VNon iL I Q cASE 0 .3 1 5HWC: FatalQhC«fc % qq'nmmV s' g‘ 0M“!Tia-alt ' . 3 }a‘‘1k¢4‘
HIGH COURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBILASPUR
SingleBench: Hon'bleShriJusticeP.SamKoshy
M.A No.176of2003
Appenant
NationalinsuranceCompanyLtd.
VERSUS
Gangaramandothers Respondents
Present: Shri QamulAziz,counselfortheappellant. Shri JitendraGupta,counselforrespondentNo.1. Shr‘ Kasif Shia‘k respondentsNo.4&5. ..... Oral Orde (05.12.2014)
complete and the .3. The Commissioner, after the pleadingswere ei/iden ces wererecorded,reachedtotheconclusionthatthecaseofthe claim stands provedtotheextentofthe employmentand the accident both having taken place arising out of and in the course of the , employment. Finally,theCommissioner,videtheimpugnedawarddated 7.10.02,heldthattheclaimantisentitledforcompensationofRs.1,37,254 disability sustained by .tow‘ards 5 0% rof the permanent‘ physical
4‘;
WI
respondent No.1/claimant.
4‘ It is this award which is p ut to challenge by way of the instant éppeal.
6,. ‘Counselforthere sp, osed the prayer made by counsel for the appellant and drew t of the Court to the findings of the Commissioner wherein the e r has categorically, dealing with the‘evidence which h a _ before the Court, has held that from the statement of the ses i.e. the claimant himself as well as another witness n a Kumar who had also deposed in support of the claimant, the accident and the employmentstands proved. According to the hnding of the Commissioner for having awarded compensation which has also not been rebutted by substantial pieceof evidence is the fact that the said witness Manoj Kumarwasalsooneof the workers working at the site when the accident took place on 19.9.1999. He has specincally deposed about the injury sustained by respondent No.1 — Gangaram. Similarly, the Commissioner‘has also drawntheinferencethatthedepositionofMitthals0farasrespondents No.2 & 3 not being awarded the contractisnotdisputedforthereason that the of Bhilai Steel Plant had in fact awarded the management contract originally to H.S.C.L and it was the management of H.S.C.Lwho gottheworkexecutedthroughdifferentagenciesi.e.howtheworkerwho was engaged by respondents No.2 & 3 could enter the placeofworkand sustained injury in the course of his employment.
Priya
l
. Sd-
P. Sam Koshy
J udge g ..
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation's award when no substantial question of law exists.
Whether the findings of the Commissioner on the nature of the accident and employment stand conclusive against the appellant's objections.
National Insurance Company Ltd.
Gangaram
M/s Babu, Petty Contractor
S Ix. Jain, Contractor
General Manager, Bhilai Steel Plant
Divisional Manager, Blast Furnace No 4
P. Sam Koshy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
