The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed an appeal against an award under the Employees Compensation Act. The court held that since the compensation amount with interest was promptly honored following a contested claim, the Commissioner was justified in imposing no penalty under Section 4-A.
None; the appeal was dismissed in limine.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MAC No. 197 of 2018
Smt. Chanda Bai Wd/o Late Radheshyam Verma Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Champa, Post Champa, Tahsil Raipur, Distt. Raipur (Chhattisgarh).
---- Appellant
Versus
Respondents No. 4 to 6 are R/o Village Champa, Post Champa, Tahsil & Raipur (Chhattisgarh).
---- Respondents
For Appellant : Shri MK Bhaduri, Advocate.
SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Judgment on Board
01.02.2018
2
3
4
justification for the delay and under said circumstances the employer can be imposed with the penalty not exceeding 50 percent of the amount awarded.
Sd/- (P.Sam Koshy) Judge
inder
3 issues framed by the court
Whether penalty under Section 4-A of the EC Act was justified given a disputed claim and subsequent payment of the award with interest.
Whether the appellate court can interfere with the Commissioner's finding that no evidence existed for a 'no justification' delay warranting penalty.
Whether the appeal raises any substantial question of law.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Chanda Bai Wd/o Late Radheshyam Verma
M/s Fonics Poultry
National Insurance Company Limited
Jagdip Verma
Vinod Verma
Khubi Ram Verma
P. Sam Koshy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
