(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the appellant. The appellant is an insurance company questioning the award of compensation in favour of respondent no. 1, a workman, who had claimed compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'EC Act', for brevity), on the footing that he had been injured as a result of an accident during and in the course of employment. The same had been contested by the appellant herein and the Commissioner having awarded a compensation in a sum of Rs. 70,942/ - after having considered the material on record and the objections raised by the appellant, the present appeal is preferred.
(2.) THE substantial questions of law that are sought to be raised in the present appeal are as follows:
(3.) IN so far as the substantial question of law that is framed, namely, whether the Commissioner was justified in arriving at a conclusion that there exists a relationship of employer and workman between the respondent No. 1 and the respondent no. 2 is concerned, is not really a question that would arise for consideration in the present case on hand, as the appellant had never raised a serious objection in this regard.