Workmen`s Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923)

DECIDED 02/11/2018

Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, Section 30 – Appeal – Only on substantial question of law  - Appeal provided under Section 30 of the Act to the High Court against the order of the Commissioner lie only against the specific orders set out in clause (a) to (e) of Section 30 of the Act with a further rider contained in first proviso to the Section that the appeal must involve substantial question of law - Appeal provided under Section 30 of the Act to the High Court against the order of the Commissioner is not like a Regular First Appeal akin to Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which can be heard both on facts and law - The appellate jurisdiction of the High Court to decide the appeal is confined only to examine the substantial questions of law arising in the case - Whether the appeal involves a substantial question of law or not depends upon the facts of each case and needs an examination by the High Court - If the substantial question of law arises, the High Court would admit the appeal for final hearing on merit else would dismiss in limini with reasons that it does not involve any substantial question/s of law.            (2018)2 SCe@Journal 1617  PUNJAB LAW REPORTER – SUPREME COURT E@JOURNAL

DECIDED 02/11/2018

Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 – Interest – Employer becomes liable to pay compensation as soon as the personal injury is caused to the workman in the accident which arose out of and in the course of employment - It was accordingly held that it is the date of the accident and not the date of adjudication of the claim, which is material (Following the four Judge Bench in Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas Sabata & Anr. (1976) 1 SCC 289: AIR 1976SC 222). (2018)2 SCe@Journal 1617

PUNJAB LAW REPORTER – SUPREME COURT E@JOURNAL

DECIDED 02/11/2018

Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, Section 30 – Appeal  – When an employer files the appeal, he is under a legal obligation to deposit the entire awarded sum in terms of second proviso to Section 30 of the Act as a pre­condition to file the appeal in the High Court except where the appeal is filed against the order falling in clause (b) - It is only when the employer deposits the entire awarded money along with the memo of appeal duly certified by the Commissioner, his appeal is regarded as being properly filed in conformity with the requirement of Section 30 of the Act. (2018)2 SCe@Journal 1617 / PUNJAB LAW REPORTER – SUPREME COURT E@JOURNAL


DECIDED 02/11/2018

Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 - Findings of fact - The question as to whether the employee met with an accident, whether the accident occurred during the course of employment, whether it arose out of an employment, how and in what manner the accident occurred, who was negligent in causing the accident, whether there existed any relationship of employee and employer, what was the age and monthly salary of the employee, how many are the dependents of the deceased employee, the extent of disability caused to the employee due to injuries suffered in an accident, whether there was any insurance coverage obtained by the employer to cover the incident etc. are some of the material issues which arise for the just decision of the Commissioner in a claim petition when an employee suffers any bodily injury or dies during the course of his employment and he/his LRs sue/s his employer to claim compensation under the Act -  The afore­mentioned questions are essentially the questions of fact and, therefore, they are required to be proved with the aid of evidence -  Once they are proved either way, the findings recorded thereon are regarded as the findings of fact. (2018)2 SCe@Journal 1617


Workmen`s Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923) Section 4 – Insurance Company has failed to show any clause which grants immunity to Insurance Company from its liability of interest - In the absence of any clause in the insurance cover, the Insurance Company is liable to pay interest.  (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER

Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923) Section  4 - Workmans Commissioner declining the claim of the deceased as he was described as `Sanjhi’ – Word is commonly used for a person who works for a share of the produce - As per learned counsel even a person who gets share of produce, from his employer has also to be considered an employee just like an employee who gets wages in cash – No flaw in the reasoning. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER

 

 

Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923) Section 4-A – Penalty - No compensation was paid to the claimants till the conclusion of the case – Enhanced the penalty amount to 35% from 20%.  (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER