HIGH €OURT GF CHHATTESGARH AT EELASPUR MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO. 379 [2002 AWEAL UEDER SECTIoN 30 OF THE. WORKMEN’S caMrENSATmN ACT? 192s. $83 :Hon’ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Prcsent:- Shri LS. Sahu, Advocate for the appellant. ORAL- ORDER [Passed on 0410312009) 1. Durmg the course of argument, learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is not deposited the amount of compellsation awarded to the respondents. In absence of such deposit appeal is not sustainable. 2. Consequently, appeal is liable to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. 3. i LA. NO. 2329/02 and M.C.P. NO. 646/02 is also dismissed. No order as to the cost. Sd/. T.P. SHARMA Judge r/n AEPELLAN? Narad Vanna, Proprietor, Vsrma Tent House, Station Maraoda, Bhilai, Distn'ct Durg (C.G.). VERSUS RE$PGNDENTS 1. Deonarayan, S/o Fattelal DevdaS, Garxda, Aged 45 years, 2. Dharmin Bai, Wfo Deonarayan Dsvdag agEd 4O years. R/o Near Sation, Maraoda, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.).