Balram Lodhi vs Narayan Prajapati
2022 Latest Caselaw 13492 MP

                                                                  1
                                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                            AT JABALPUR
                                                                 BEFORE
                                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                        ON THE 13th OF OCTOBER, 2022

                                                   REVIEW PETITION No. 241 of 2019

                                          BETWEEN:-
                                  1.      BALRAM LODHI S/O SHRI PRATAP LODHI,
                                          AGED    ABOUT   50  YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                          AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE GARHI JAMUNIA
                                          P.S. GOURJHAMAR, TEHSIL DEORI, DISTT.
                                          SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                  2.      MAHENDRA LODHI S/O SHRI BALRAM LODHI,
                                          AGED     ABOUT   30   YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                          AGRICULTURIST,    R/O   VILLAGE   GARHI
                                          JAMUNIA PS GOURJHAMAR TEH. DEORI,
                                          DISTT. SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....APPLICANTS
                                          (BY SHRI ATUL CHAUDHARY, ADVOCATE)

                                          AND
                                  1.      NARAYAN PRAJAPATI S/O SHRI CHURAMAN
                                          PRAJAPATI, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, MINOR
                                          THR. HIS FATHER CHURAMAN @ HALLA AGED
                                          ABOUT 45, R/O VILLAGE GARHI JAMUNIA P.S.
                                          GOURJHAMAR, TEHSIL DEORI, DISTT. SAGAR
                                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                  2.      COMMISSIONER      FOR            WORKMEN'S
                                          COMPENSATION   LABOUR          COURT SAGAR
                                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....RESPONDENTS
                                          (BY SHRI VINAY SINGH BAGHEL, ADVOCATE)

                                        This petition coming on for hearing on this day, the court passed the
                                  following:
                                                                   ORDER

Signature Not Verified SAN This review petition is filed seeking review of order dated 14/06/2016 Digitally signed by TULSA SINGH Date: 2022.10.14 18:23:40 IST passed in W.P. No.15591/2015.

Shri Atul Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that writ petition was filed on the ground that learned Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act refused to set aside ex-parte award and allowed an application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC. It is submitted that the then learned counsel Shri Syed Masud Ali who is no more under a wrong impression that appeal can be filed directly under the provisions of Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 withdrew the writ petition with liberty to file appeal. But, as per the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case o f Mohasinali Merchant Vs. Shyamlal and others, (2000) 9 SCC 734, wherein it is held that writ petition is maintainable and is to be considered on its

own merits as appeal will not lie against an ex-parte judgment. In para-3 of the said judgment, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under :

"3. A perusal of the Workmen's Compensation Act indicates that an order passed by the Commissioner rejecting an application for setting aside an ex-parte award is not appealable. The appellant could approach only the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution"

Thus, in view of such facts, review petition is allowed. Writ petition is restored to its original number.

List this writ petition for hearing on merits. Accordingly, review petition is disposed of.

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by TULSA SINGH Date: 2022.10.14 18:23:40 IST

(VIVEK AGARWAL)

JUDGE ts

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by TULSA SINGH Date: 2022.10.14 18:23:40 IST