IK 'siSiSfs'^s-svs^iijmissESiv^M "lTHEJIICTi_COU;Rr OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR, ^ i ^^ CHHATTISGARH -- ^f". MIESC. APPEALJ^- )NO. j0^€ OF 2009^^: | !-5'^^^i VSSiOit B®! APPELLANT/ CLAIMAIVT ^^ ••^M-^I. ti. ^\-^' ^^ RESPONDENTEi Krishna Kumar .Bhaskar, S/o Palu Ram Bhaskar, aged about 20 years, Occuaption Labourer, R/o village Sarsivan, Tahsil Baloda Bazar, District Raigarh (CG). Versus 1. Sajijay Agrawal, S/o Not known, aged about 34 years. Karnal Kumar, S/o Not Known, aged about 32 years. Both R/o Bawli Kunwa, Baikunthpur, Madhubiui Bhawan, Dist. Raigarh. (CG). 3. Vijay Agrawal, S/o Late Shri G.D. Agrawal, aged about 37 years, Occupation Service, R/o Jamgaon, PS Chala-adhar Nagar, Raigarh. Presently R/o Rai.garh Ispat Limited, Village Dilari, PS Kotwali, Ralgarh Dist. Raigarh (CG). 4. Munna, S/o Vishwanath Singh, aged about 35 yeai-s, Occiipation Contractor, R/o Villa.ge Nawagaon, PS Ramnagar, District Pachri Chajnbar (Bihar). Presently R/o village Taraimal, PS Tamnar, District Raigai-h (CG). APPEAL UNDER SBCTION 30 OFJTHEJVORKMEN (^OMPENSATION ACT, 1923 ^ €- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Appellant Claimant Respondents Wlisc. Appeal (C) No. 1065 of2009 Krishna Kumar Bhaskar, s/o Palu Ram Bhaskar, aged about 20 years, occupation Labourer, r/o village Sarsivan, tahsil Baloda Bazar, district Raigarh C.G. VERSUS 1 Sanjay Agrawal, s/o not known,aged about 34 years. 2 Kamal Kumar, s/o not known, aged about 32 years. Both r/o Bawli Kunwa, Baikunthpur, Madhuban Bhawan, distt. Raigarh C.G. 3 Vijay Agrawal, s/o late Shri G.D. Agrawal, aged about 37 years, occupation Service, r/o Jamgaon, P.S. Chakradhar Nagar, Raigarh. Presently r/o Raigarh Ispat Limited, village Dilari, P.S. Kotwali, Raigarh, dist. Raigarh C.G. 4 Munna, s/o Vishwanath Singh aged about 35 years, occupation Contractor, r/o village Nawagaon, P.S. Ramnagar, district Pachri Chambar (Bihar) Presently r/o village Taraimal, P.S. Tamnar, district Raigarh C.G. Memo of appeal under Section 30 ofWorkmen Comoensation Act.1923. Present: Shri Rajendra Tripathi, counsel for the appellant. ' Ms. Sunita Jain, counsel for respondents No.1, 2 & 3. r.#^~^ fe-SCTB.. B vts^sb 9 -sa ^s-x ^s^ .A.C. No. 1065 of 2009 ORDER (03rd November, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimant's appeal filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Commissioner for Workmen/ Labour Court, Raigarh (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 13.01.2009, passed in CaseNo.109/W.C. Act/05 (nonfatal). 2) As against the compensation of Rs. 10,99,6007- claimed by the appellanV claimant by filing a claim petition under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for the injuries sustained by him in the accident during the course of his employment on 14.08.2005, the Commissioner/ Labour Court awarded a total sum of Rs.3,22.560/- as compensation along with interest @12% per annum. 3) The Commissioner/ Labour Court on a thorough consideration of the entire evidence led before it held that claimant Krishan Kumar Bhaskar at the relevant time was in the employment of respondents No.1 and 2; the claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including amputation in the accident which occurred during the course of his employment with respondents No.1 and 2 on 14.08.2005. 4) The Commissioner/ Labour Court held that the claimant was getting Rs.2,400/- per month as salary. Considering the ^a"—;'S^ •^®^, '^^^vsy^ "i'^ ^••••^ ,•••"'" .^ "^sy M.A.C. No. 1065 of 2009 permanent disability certified by the doctor at 40% to be 100% as the daimant on account of the injuries and amputation was rendered unfit to pursue his occupation as labour, the Commissioner/ Labour Couri: assessed the total compensation payable to the claimant at Rs.3,22,560/- by multiplying 60% of his salary of Rs.2,400/- per month with the factor value of 224. The Commissioner/ Labour Court, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.3,22,560/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by him in the accident during the course of his employment. The Commissioner/ Labour Court further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.3,22,560/- @ 12% perannum. 5) Respondents No.1 Sanj'ay Agrawal, No.2 Kamal Kumarand No:3 Vijay Agrawal have also filed cross-objections in this appeal challenging the impugned award mainly on the ground. that the claimant was never in their employment; the Commissioner/ Labour Court has erred in treating the permanent disability of 40% as 100%; in assessing the income of the claimant at Rs.2,400/- per month; in assessing his age as 20 years only. 6) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties; the findings recorded by the Commissioner/ Labour Court in the impugned award; the pleadings of the p'arties; and the evidence led by them before the Commissioner/ Labour Court, we are satisfied that the impugned award does not suffer from any infirmity whatsoever. •"^ •>1;:^-?:^ Si ^ -i-y' AC. No. 1065 of 2009 7) As neither the appeal filed by the claimant nor the cross-objections filed by respondents No.1, 2 and 3 involve any question of law much less a substantial question of law, the appeal as well as the cross-objections are liable to be dismissed and are hereby dismissed. 8) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Rangnath Chandrakar Judge