G. UTHIRAMUTHU Vs. M.C. SUGUMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVEAL that officers of the Punjab State Electricity Board were quite aware of the statutory rights of appellant No.1 and their corresponding obligation yet they denied him his lawful dues by means that can only be called disingenuous. '' observed the Supreme Court in the decision reported in 2008 (1) SCC 579 (Bhagwan Dass and another vs. Punjab State Electricity Board). This case is the best example which would fit in with the observation made above.

(2.) HOW an employee/claimant/litigant who suffered compression fracture T12 Vertebra, Disc Bulging at L -3, L -4 and L -4 L -5 level and Postero -Central Disc Protrusion at L -3 -L -4 and having been declared as ''unfit to be completely/ permanently incapacitated for further service of any kind '' was treated by his own employer, by the Insurance Company as well as by the Court, would be evident, if the grounds of appeal are looked into.

(3.) AS against the claim made for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/ - in respect of the injuries sustained in an accident that took place on 17.02.2001, the Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.76,650/ -, with interest at 9% per annum.