J L ARORA Vs. COMM WORKMENS COMPENSATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant prays for adjournment. Counsel states that the arguing counsel Shri Manish Kumar Siryal is not available today. Counsel states that the counsel has gone to Allahabad to argue a case.

(2.) The instant matter was adjourned for today on 28.9.2007. I see no reason why counsel for the appellant proceeded to Allahabad when he was aware that the instant appeal is listed today.

(3.) I have declined the request for adjournment. My reason for declining adjournment is my practical experience sitting on the roster where first appeals and second appeals are listed. First appeals against orders passed by the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation and the Railway Claims Tribunal are being listed in my Court. I have been noticing that in cases of grievous injuries and death, the claimants are unable to sustain themselves by living in the city of Delhi and await the outcome of their appeal. In each and every case where the employer or the insurance company has challenged the order of compensation I note that for approximately a year counsel for the claimants appears and thereafter stops appearing probably for the reason the claimants leave the city of Delhi and the lawyer loses interest.