MALIK ICE FACTORY, KARACHI versus MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE
Workmen's Compensation Act 1923 Section 2 (1) (n) and Schedule II, Rr 3, 4 and 8 Challenge to pay compensation money to the heirs of persons who lost their lives due to explosion at the factory. The employer was claiming that the deceased were not described under section 2 (1) (n) of the Workers' Compensation Act, 1923, because the factory employed less than ten persons because the factory was dead for display. The heirs of the people did what they could. While more than fourteen people were employed, the employer could not produce any evidence in the rejected persons to prove that the factory employed less than ten persons in the inheritance of the deceased. Was entitled to receive such compensation as was submitted to the Commissioner. Workers' compensation
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
power of attorney advocate Sakrand lawyer
