RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY Vs. RADHARAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A challenge in the instant misc. appeal has been made to the impugned judgment and award dtd. 27/3/2017 passed by the Court of learned Commissioner Workmen's Compensation, Bharatpur (for short 'the learned Commissioner') in claim case No. E.C.A. (N.F.)/D-47/2011 by which the claim petition filed by the claimant-respondent has been allowed and the Insurance company has been directed to pay compensation of Rs.3,99,322.00 to the claimant-respondent with interest.

(2.) Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal on the ground that there is no existence of relationship of employee and employer between the injured and the insured. Counsel further submits that the driver of the vehicle was not having a valid license. Hence, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any amount of compensation of the claimant-respondent.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the claimant- respondent opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the appellant and submits that finding of facts have been recorded by the learned Commissioner while passing the award after appreciating the evidence available on the record. Counsel further submits that finding of fact recorded by the learned Commissioner cannot be re-appreciated by this Court while exercising its powers under Sec. 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short ..the Act of 1923..) as the appeal is maintainable only on the basis of substantial question of law and no substantial question is involved in the present appeal.