Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Employees State Insurance Corp. vs Nabi Sher Khan
2022 Latest Caselaw 4341 ALL

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 4341 ALL
Judgement Date : 26 May, 2022

Allahabad High Court
Employees State Insurance Corp. vs Nabi Sher Khan on 26 May, 2022
Bench: Kaushal Jayendra Thaker



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 2
 

 
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1360 of 1993
 

 
Appellant :- Employees State Insurance Corp.
 
Respondent :- Nabi Sher Khan
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Tiwari
 

 
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

1. By way of this appeal the Employees State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'ESIC') has felt aggrieved by the order dated 27.4.1993 passed by Judge, Employees Insurance Court, Kanpur whereby it had allowed the appeal upturning the decision of the medical board in Appeal No. 57 of 1993.

2. The Apex Court recently in Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. Vs. Divisional Manager and Another, 2017 (1) TAC 259 (SC) and this High Court in FAFO 1070 of 1993 (E.S.I.C. Vs. S. Prasad) decided on 26.10.2017 has held as follows:

"The grounds urged before this Court are in the realm of finding of facts and not a question of law. As far as question of law is concerned, the aforesaid judgment in Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. Versus Divisional Manager and another (supra) in paragraph 8 holds as follows "the Workman Compensation Commissioner is the last authority on facts. The Parliament has thought it fit to restrict the scope of the appeal only to substantial questions of law, being a welfare legislation. Unfortunately, the High Court has missed this crucial question of limited jurisdiction and has ventured to re-appreciate the evidence and recorded its own findings on percentage of disability for which also there is no basis."

3. The Apex Court in North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Sujatha, AIR 2018 SC 5593, has held that unless perversity is pointed out, the first appellate Court should not easily interfere with the findings of facts and percentage of disability is a question of fact. No perversity has been pointed out, hence no interference is called far.

4. In view of the above, this appeal sans merit and is dismissed. Interim relief, if any, shall stands vacated.

Order Date :- 26.5.2022

Deepak/Irshad

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter