Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


E.S.T.C. v. Har Deo Singh - FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2314 of 2003 [2007] RD-AH 16377 (5 October 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 1

First Appeal From Order No. 2314 of 2003

Employees State Insurance

Corporation Appellant/Respondent


Hardev Singh Respondent/Appellant

Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.

List revised.

Heard Sri P.K. Asthana, learned counsel for the appellant. No one appears for the respondent.

This appeal under Section 82 of the Employees Insurance Act, 1948 is directed against the order of the Employees Insurance court dated 24.3.1988.

The respondent was an employee of Elgin Mills No. II, Kanpur. He sustained employment injury in his right middle finger. The Medical Board vide order dated 15.12.1987 refused to grant him any relief. Accordingly he preferred an appeal before the Employees Insurance court. The Employees Insurance court by the impugned order has determined the loss of earning capacity to the tune of 5% on account of the aforesaid injury.

Learned counsel for the appellant has raised only one substantial question of law i.e., whether in absence of any medical report the Employees Insurance court was competent to determine the loss of earning capacity when the medical board has rejected the claim.

In this regard it may be noted that the the medical board of the Employees' State Insurance Corporation consists of doctors who are experts in medical field. Their opinion cannot be over-ruled unless cogent evidence or better evidence in the form of opinion of other doctors or medical experts is produced. In the instant case the respondent has not adduced any evidence to rebut or falsify the report of the medical board or to establish that the decision of the Medical Board was incorrect. The court cannot be recognized as an authority to sit as an expert in medical matters. Accordingly, in the absence of any medical report so as to establish that the injury sustained by the respondent was not of such a nature as to result in permanent partial disablement causing loss of earning capacity, the court was not justified in passing the impugned order.

Thus, it is held that the employees' Insurance court was not competent to determine the loss of earning capacity of the injured without there being any medical report in support.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Order of the Employees Insurance court dated 24.3.1988 is set aside. However, the benefit which has already been extended to the respondent shall not be recovered from him.




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


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 |

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