Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Appeal No. WCK‑72 of 1975, decided on 24th June 1975.
‑‑ S. 30‑Question whether evidence of one witness should be accepted in preference to other‑Question of fact, not assailable in appeal.
---Doctor certifying that workman suffered permanent partial disability to extent of 25 yd‑Contention that fact of workman's being still in service and drawing same salary was sufficient to rebut evidence of Doctor‑Held, without force.
Divisional Superintendent v. Anwar Ali Appeal No. 25 of 1970 ref.
Unman Ghani Rashid, A. A.‑G. for Appellant.
S. A. Channa for Respondent.
This is an appeal under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act against the order of the Commissioner awarding compensation to the respon dent.
2. The respondent was in the employment of the Pakistan Railways. He sustained injuries. He received treatment in the Railways Hospital for 21 months. Subsequently he obtained a certificate from Dr. Aftab Ahmed Qureshi to the effect that he had suffered permanent partial disability t the extent of 25%. On the basis of this certificate he filed the claim. The appellant res1sted claim and pleaded that the respondent did not suffer any disability and he was still in service drawing the same salary.
3. Evidence was recorded. The respondent examined Dr. Aftab Ahmed Qureshi while the appellant examined Dr. Syed Mohammad Ehtisham to refute the certificate (sued by the former Doctor. The learned Commissioner accepted evidence of Dr. Aftab Ahmed Qureshi and awarded the compensa tion.
4. The question whether the evidence of one Doctor should be accepted in preference to the other is a question of fact and cannot be assailed in appeal.
5. Mr. Usman Ghani, appearing on behalf of the appellant, however, contended that the respondent was still in service and drawing the same salary and this was sufficient to rebut the evidence of Dr. Aftab Ahmed a Qureshi. This ground has no force in view of the decision of the High Court of Sind & Baluch1stan in Misc. Appeal No. 25 of 1970 in the case of Divisional Superintendent v. Anwar All, decided on the 31st of August. 1972.
6. In the result the appeal is dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer