You may also like...
-
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Crl.R.C.Nos.971 and 938 of 2014. Corruption case. The sentence of imprisonment for a period of 6 months is set aside. The punishment of fine alone is confirmed. Of the fine amount paid by the accused, a sum of Rs.2000/- is ordered to be paid as compensation to the respondent complainant.
by Sekar Reporter · Published February 15, 2022
-
-
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM C.M.A.No.1121 of 2016—–With reference to the filing of the appeal by the workmen, this Court is of the considered opinion that the employer shifted his liability. The case on hand is a classic case where the employer has not taken care regarding the rights of the workmen. The Insurance Company is also attempting to restrict its liability. Ultimately, the very purpose and object of the Workmen Compensation Act is defeated. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that in the event of employer or the Insurance Company shifting its responsibility, the Courts are expected to act swiftly and pay “just compensation” immediately and liberty may be granted to the Insurance Company concerned to initiate action against the employer for recovery in accordance with law.
by Sekar Reporter · Published February 22, 2021