AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Deepak Gupta, CJ. - The only issue involved in this case is,
"Whether, the learned Commissioner has properly assessed the income of the deceased or not."
An appeal under the Workmens Compensation Act is maintainable only on a substantial question of law. While admitting the appeal no substantial question of law was framed. However, along with the grounds of appeal the claimant has framed certain substantial questions of law which read as follows:
(i) Whether Learned Commissioner, Workmens Compensation in passing the Judgment and Award legally could travel beyond the pleading and evidence on record in respect of income of the deceased?
(ii) Whether the Ld. Commissioner below could impose own view deferent from the un-contributed evidence in regard with, monthly wages of the deceased and even after such wages admitted by the concerned employer?
(iii) Whether the Ld. Commissioner below in passing the impugned judgment and award arrived at just decision and awarded just compensation?
(iv) Whether the impugned judgment and Award based on surmise and no evidence is liable to be modified?"
The assessment of compensation is a question of fact and not a question of law. The learned Commissioner held that he could not rely upon the certificate of the owner since the practice of giving Rs. 2000/- per trip was an unknown practice. He has, as per the certificate of the owner, granted salary of Rs. 1,500/- per month and Rs. 100/- per day for food and lodging. In my opinion, this is a very reasonable assessment of the income. I find no reason to enhance the same.
No question of law much less a substantial question of law arises in the appeal which is accordingly dismissed.
Send down the lower court records forthwith.