The State of Maharashtra v. Sopan Nivruti Kasbe
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Appeal is dismissed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. No substantial question of law is involved. Appeal is dismissed. (A.S.OKA,J.) (A.S.OKA,J.) (A.S.OKA,J.)
Judgment
FIRST APPEAL NO.411 OF 1986 The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant Vs. Sopan Nivruti Kasbe and Anr. ...Respondents. Mr.A.R.Patil, A.G.P., for the Appellant-State. CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. DATED: 2ND FEBRUARY,2007. DATED: 2ND FEBRUARY,2007. DATED: 2ND FEBRUARY,2007. P.C.:
The Appeal is still pending for effecting service of notice to the second Respondent. Though, by order dated 6th March, 2006 paper publication was allowed, till today the copies of the newspaper are not filed.
Heard learned A.G.P. for the Appellant-State. The challenge in the First Appeal is to the judgment and order dated 29th November, 1985 passed under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, where compensation of Rs.8400/- has been awarded with penalty and interest. The submission of the learned A.G.P. is that there was no evidence on record to show that the original claimant belongs to income group of Rs.800/- to Rs.900/- per month. He submitted that the original claimant was working on daily wages as a casual ..(2).. labourer.
I have considered this submission. The evidence has been led by the claimant to show that he belonged to wage group of Rs.800/- to Rs.900/-. There is a finding recorded by the learned Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation that there was no serious challenge to this aspect as well as to the case of the claimant that he suffered from 20% permanent disability. In view of this finding, compensation of Rs.8400/- has been awarded by the learned Commissioner.
No substantial question of law is involved. Appeal is dismissed. (A.S.OKA,J.) (A.S.OKA,J.)
(A.S.OKA,J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Appeal is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 02 Feb 2007. The bench was A S OKA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.