Court No. - 27
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1363 of 1993 Appellant :- E.S.I. Corporation Respondent :- Mauju Lal Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- I.M. Tripathi
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant. Sri I.M. Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent is absent even in the revised.
2. By way of this appeal the Employees State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'ESIC') has felt aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 27.4.1993 passed by Judge, Employees Insurance Court, Kanpur whereby it had allowed the appeal upturning the decision of the medical board in Appeal No. 19 of 1991.
3. 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."
4. In view of the above, this appeal sans merit and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.11.2017/DKS