Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S NARENDERA METAL WORKS versus WORKMAN COMPENSATION COMMISSIONER, GURGA

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/s Narendera Metal Works v. Workman Compensation Commissioner, Gurga - CR-3789-1991 [2006] RD-P&H 1293 (1 March 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Case No. : C.R.No.3789 of 1991

Date of Decision : February 22, 2006.

M/s Narendera Metal Works .... Petitioner Vs.

Workman Compensation Commissioner,

Gurgaon and another .... Respondents

Coram : Hon'ble Mr.Justice Viney Mittal.

* * *

Present : Mr.Deepak Thapar, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr.J.S. Yadav, Advocate

for the respondents.

JUDGMENT (Oral) :

The workman had filed an application under Section 22 of the Workman Compensation Act claiming compensation and penalty for injury received by him. The aforesaid petition filed by the workman was allowed vide an ex-parte award dated September 21, 1990.

An application was filed by the present petitioner-M/s Narendera Metal Works for setting aside the aforesaid ex-parte award. Vide order dated March 07, 1991, the aforesaid application has been dismissed by the Commissioner, Workman Compensation Act. The said order dated March 07, 1991 has been challenged by the petitioner through the present revision petition.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I direct that if the petitioners deposit the total amount as per the award dated September 21, 1990 within a period of three months from today with the Commissioner, Workman Compensation Act, Gurgaon, then the aforesaid C.R.No.3789 of 1991 : 2 :

ex-parte award dated September 21, 1990 shall stand set aside. On depositing the aforesaid amount, the same shall be disbursed to the workman-claimant, on his furnishing adequate security for the refund of the aforesaid amount, in case the petitioner does succeed before the Commissioner. The security shall be accepted after due notice to the present petitioner.

In case the amount in question is deposited and therefore, the award is taken to be set aside, then the petitioner would at entitled to contest the claim petition filed by the workman by taking all such pleas which are available to him, in accordance with law.

The present petition is disposed of, accordingly.

It is further made clear that in case the petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid amount, within the stipulated period of three months, then the present revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed.

The parties, through their counsel, are directed to appear before the Commissioner, Workman Compensation Act, Gurgaon on April 17, 2006.

A copy of this order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.

February 22, 2006 ( VINEY MITTAL )

monika JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.