Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.45 seconds)Section 2 in The Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Explosive Substances Act, 1908 [Entire Act]
National Sewing Thread Co. Ltd vs James Chadwick & Bros. Ltd.(J.& P. Coats ... on 7 May, 1953
Therefore, the evidence, oral and documentary placed on record does not support the case of death in an accident arising out and in the course of employment. Since there is no evidence or material to support the claimant's plea that the deceased died in the accident that arose out of and in the course of his employment, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation erred in holding so. Even as per the pleading of the claimant about the nature of accident, the claim cannot be accepted. The findings of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation are not supported by the evidence on record and the reasonings are totally untenable. Tested on the parameters laid down by the Apex Court as has been extracted above, the case of the claimant cannot be accepted. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation exceeded his jurisdiction by invoking the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, as the provisions of Section 3 of the Workmen's Compensation Act is not attracted to this case.
Shakuntala Bai Pandey (Smt) vs National Thermal Power Corporation ... on 3 February, 1995
The decision in Sakuntala Bai Pandey v. National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. reported in 1997(1) LLN 1026 relied on by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Act is a case of compassionate appointment and does not apply to the facts of the present case. In the result, the question of law is answered in favour of the appellant.
Regional Director, E.S.I Corpn. And Anr vs Francis De Costa And Anr on 5 May, 1992
In "Francis De Costa" case cited above, the Apex Court while discussing the scope of the term "arising out of...his employment", observed in paras 6 and 7 as follows:
The Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948
Section 3 in The Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 [Entire Act]
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Saurashtra Salt Manufacturing Co. vs Bai Valu Raja And Ors. on 28 April, 1958
"The meaning of the words" in the course of his employment" appearing in Section 3(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, was examined by this Court in the case of Saurashtra Salt Manufacturing Co. v. Bai Valu Raja There, the appellant, a salt manufacturing company, employed workmen both temporary and permanent. The salt-works was situated near a creek opposite to the town of Porbander. The salt-works could be reached by at least two ways from the town, one an overland route nearly nearly 6 to 7 miles long and the other via a creek which had to be crossed by a boat. In the evening of 12.6.1952, a boat carrying some of the workmen, capsized due to bad weather and overloading. As a result of this, some of the workmen were drowned. One of the questions that came up for consideration was whether the accident had taken place in the course of the employment of the workers. S. Jafer Imam J., speaking for the Court, held: