311^1 ?iT R-li'* ^^ 3TI^T ?h+i g^T ^w\<ft<f, WT^WW, ^wy. ^Wv\\ *M|cb .En. fC ) N0 . 10^ 1 /2-(re'? 21 Wt. 200 3n^?T 'w (1pfg«i^w) TOIIWdfelCT^T MISC. APPE APPELLANTs 1. 2. RESPONDENTS D.B: HON'Bl HON'BU LC.Bhadoo. J. Shri C.R. Sahu, couns^l The appeal is barrec| admission as well as on limitati 'sn''<[CT<<ll^l*|];ff 'ii1®^<(a|^|< ^7 sjfirir 3n^T L (CLAIM) N0.1051/2007 ^ularin Bai, aged about 21 years, Wd/o ^te Aajuram Patel, r/o village Raikheda, ?ost Raikheda, Kharora, Distt. Raipur |;u. Chhaya Patel, d/o Aajuram Patel, }ged about 1 % years, Minor Guardian tirough Mother Dutarin Bai, wd/o late ^ajuram Patet, r/o village Raikheda, Post iaikheda Kharora, Distt. Raipur (C.G). Versus Rajbahadur Singh s/o Kalika Singh, aged about 38 years, Contractor Ispat Limited Industrial Area Siltara, Permanent Address: Bhilai 4, Lane No.9 Distt. Durg (C.G). M/s. Godavrai Ispat Limited, Industrial Area, Siltara, P.S. Dharsiva, Distt. Raipur (C.G) .E SHRIL.C. BHADOO, J, & E SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA,_J. bRALORDER (18.09.2007) fortheappellants. by 150 days' limitation. It is heard on on. XI-HC—78 an^r ?ii K-iith WIT 311^1 ihii=t> 'ys^ '^wivft'ti, atliy'is, Rioiiyy V>~ 1\ ^ y^o, \0'5t /^an VtW^l *NI*"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""W^ sn^r wra? (lll!i'A°l<tr) TOIRK ^ll^T 3Tltw The appellants who are v^ife and daughter of the deceased Aajuram Patel, have preferred this appea passed by the Commissioner f(| Raipur, in case No.277AWC Act, We have heard counsel f<>rthe appellant. In issue no.3, the learfied commissloner after considering the evidence of employer namety B deceased was getting Rs.205(y- per month as per Annexure P-2 which was sent by letter dt.26.3.2002 Security, Raipur. In issue no.4 provisions of section 4(1)0f tl^e Workmen Compensation Act 1923 the claimant is entitled for 50% as| after determining the 23 years factor 219.93, a total compen< awarded. Learned counsel for the| how the award is on the lowerl Section 30 of the Workmen I appellant has not been able to ^filft:l4iTT^i^i<;Tf^'f^^T ^^R ^sifwsii^T being aggrieved by the order dt.07.2.2007 ^r Workmen Compensation, Labour Court, |2002 (Fatal). '. Singh reached to the conclusion that the to the Joint Director, Industrial Health and it has been further hetd that in view of the compensation of the monthly satary and age of deceased by applying the relevant sation amount of Rs.2,25,428/- has been appellant has not been abte to argue that side. More over, as per the provisions of Compensation Act 1923, an appeal is maintainable on the substantijal questlon of law. The counsel for the aise any substantial question of taw in this appeal. Not only this, no reasofiable case has been shown tocondone the delay in filing ofthis appeal. Therefore, the appeat lj)eing devoid of merit, the same is liable to be and is hereby dismissed on (nerits aswell as on limitation, at the motion stage. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge