NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. MANORAMA SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSURER is the appellant in this appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act' ).

(2.) WHEN notice of the appeal in limitation matter was sent to the claiment-respondent, she entered appearance and filed an application to direct the appellant to deposit the awarded amount and to permit her to withdraw the same. In order that the appeal can be finally disposed of if the records of the claim proceeding are called for, direction was issued to that effect and records have been received. With consent of learned counsel for the claimant and learned counsel for the insurer, question of limitation of the appeal, deposit of the amount payable by appellant and merit of the appeal were heard. It is agreed that in case delay is condoned and appeal is held to be entertainable without deposit as required under Section 30 (1), Third Proviso of the Act, appeal can be admitted and heard on merits without notice to the owner respondent.

(3.) SECTION 3 (a) Third Proviso of the Act provides that the employer preferring appeal against his liability under Section 30 (1) (a) of the Act is to file the certificate of the Commissioner evidencing deposit of the awarded compensation along with the memorandum of appeal. This being a mandatory pre-condition creating impediment on the right of appeal vested in an employer, there would be no scope for consideration of question of condonation of delay in presenting the appeal where such certificate does not accompany the memorandum of appeal. Question of condonation of delay can be considered only after the certificate is filed.