Smt. Dilmati Devi vs Kali Charan Jha,Regional ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 28068 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:195505
 
Court No. - 9
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6560 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Smt. Dilmati Devi
 
Opposite Party :- Kali Charan Jha,Regional Director And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Indrasen Singh Tomar
 

 
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the order dated 29.09.2022 passed in F.A.F.O. No. 963 of 2008, which is as under:-

"1. Heard Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant.

2. Without adverting to the facts, it is clear that the order of the learned Commissioner, E.I. Court is challenged, challenging the disability of the insured person. This fact is a question of fact, the finding of fact is neither perverse nor explicable. It is an admitted position of fact that there was employment injury. The factor applied cannot be said to be such which is said to be perverse. Injuries were assessed by the E.I. Court. The claim petition was allowed and injured has been disabled which would reduce his working capacity. These are the questions of facts. Order of the E.I Court does not spell out any perversity.

3. Recently the Apex Court in the judgment in Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. Vs. Divisional Manager and Another, 2017 (1) TAC 259 (SC) and later on in Civil Appeal No.7470 of 2009 North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Sujatha decided on 2.11.2018 wherein it has been held that under Section 30, the High Court cannot enter into the arena of facts unless they are proved to be perverse.

4. In this matter learned Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant though has vehemently submitted is not been able to show that the finding is perverse.

5. In that view of the matter, this Court even supported in its view in the judgment of the Apex Court in Oriental Insurance Company Vs. Siby George and Others, 2012 (4) T.A.C. 4 (S.C.) and the F.A.F.O No. 2748 of 2019 dated 15.10.2019.

6. In view of the above, the appeal fails and is dismissed. The questions of law framed are answered against it. In fact the substantial questions of law raised are the questions of fact.

7. This Court is thankful to Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant for ably assisting this Court.

8. Interim relief, if any, shall stand vacated forthwith. The amount be disbursed to the claimant forthwith."

From perusal of the order passed by appellate Court, it is clear that appeal filed by Employees State Insurance Corporation was dismissed. The applicant has remedy of filing execution case before authorities concerned.

No case for contempt is made out.

The contempt application is misconceived and stands dismissed.

Order Date :- 11.10.2023

V.S.Singh