RAJKUMARI Vs. RAGHUNATH BHOI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B. Sahoo (for A.Mohanty), learned counsel for the appellant and Smt. Rimjhim Pati (for P.Ray), learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3-Insurance Company. None appears for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in spite of valid service of notice.

(2.) In this appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation's Act, 1923 (for short, 'the Act'), the appellant (widow of the workman) assails the judgment and award dated 12.12.1994 passed by learned Assistant Labour Commissioner and Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Rourkela (for short, 'the Commissioner') in W.C. Case No. 4 of 1991 awarding a compensation of Rs.88,548/- and saddling the liability to pay the compensation on respondent No.1-the employer.

(3.) Although no substantial question of law has been framed in this appeal, Mr. Sahoo (for A.Mohanty), learned counsel for the appellant submits that the substantial question of law involved in this case is.