Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

E S I Cor vs Mohd Zamid

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 May, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 3
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 736 of 1991 Appellant :- E.S.I.Cor.
Respondent :- Mohd.Zamid Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- A.K.Sachan
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. By way of this appeal the Employees State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'ESIC') has felt aggrieved by the order dated 1.6.1991 passed by Judge, Employees Insurance Court, Kanpur whereby it had allowed the appeal upturning the decision of the medical board in Appeal No. 188 of 1990.
2. The only ground is that expert should examine the injured and his conditions were reevaluated. The Apex Court recently in Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. Vs. Divisional Manager and Another, 2017 (1) TAC 259 (SC) and this High Court in FAFO 1070 of 1993 (E.S.I.C. Vs. S. Prasad) decided on 26.10.2017 has held as follows:
"The grounds urged before this Court are in the realm of finding of facts and not a question of law. As far as question of law is concerned, the aforesaid judgment in Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. Versus Divisional Manager and another (supra) in paragraph 8 holds as follows "the Workman Compensation Commissioner is the last authority on facts. The Parliament has thought it fit to restrict the scope of the appeal only to substantial questions of law, being a welfare legislation. Unfortunately, the High Court has missed this crucial question of limited jurisdiction and has ventured to re-appreciate the evidence and recorded its own findings on percentage of disability for which also there is no basis."
3. The Apex Court in North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Sujatha, AIR 2018 SC 5593 has held that unless perversity is pointed out, the first appellate Court should not easily interfere with the findings of facts and percentage of disability is a question of fact. No perversity has been pointed out, hence no interference is called far.
4. In view of the above, this appeal sans merit and is dismissed. Interim relief, if any, shall stands vacated.
Order Date :- 31.5.2019 Mukesh
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

E S I Cor vs Mohd Zamid

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 May, 2019
Judges
  • Kaushal Jayendra
Advocates
  • Rajesh Tiwari