Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. GA‑4‑of 1982, decided on 29th May, 1983.

‑‑ S. 30‑Deceased whether a workman‑Question of fact‑Cannot be raised for first time in appeal.

‑‑ S. 30 read with West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. O. 10‑B (4) & (5)‑Claim of group insurance amount‑To be settled in same manner as provided for compensation under Workmen's Compensa tion Act, 1923 ‑ Order passed under S. O. 10‑B (5) of West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968 ‑ Open to appeal under S. 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

Zia Ullah Malik for Appellant.

Zafar Saleem for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 23rd May, 1983.

The order dated 6th December, 1981 passed by the learned Commis sioner for Workmen's Compensation has been challenged in this appeal. The learned Commissioner allowed Rs. 15,000 as compensation for the loss of the life of Muhammad Hameed (deceased) as group insurance amount.

2. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that Muhammad Hameed (deceased) was not a workman and that Municipal Committee, Wazirabad, not being and industry, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation had no jurisdiction. These points were not raised in the written statement therefore, both the parties did not produce evidence on the said points. Questions of fact are always raised before the trial Court, and not for the first time before the appellate Court. The pay of the deceased was Rs. 350 per month, therefore, according to Schedule IV, Rs. 15,000 were rightly fixed as compensation. Admittedly, the deceased had not been insured under the Group Insurance Scheme.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent has raised objection to the effect that section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act does not cover the present appeal, therefore, the appeal does not lie. I do not find any force in this argument. According to Standing Order 10‑B, clause (5), claims of workmen for the recovery of money under clause (4) are to be settled in the same manner as is provided for the determination and recovery of compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act. As the said Act is applicable, the appeal under section 30 of the said Act lies to this Tribunal. I, therefore, overrule the objection.

4. As a result of the observations made above, I do not find any force in the appeal and dismiss it on merits.

A. E.

Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.