CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court

No Proof of Earning Capacity Loss Leads to Dismissal of Compensation Claim: High Court Upholds Decision in Workmen's Compensation Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab & Haryana High Court affirmed the dismissal of a workmen's compensation claim, emphasizing the critical importance of evidential proof in establishing loss of earning capacity.

The court's decision revolved around the application of Section 4(1)(c)(ii) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The key legal issue was the claimant's failure to adequately prove the extent of loss of earning capacity resulting from his workplace injury.

Facts and Issues: Ishpal, employed as a laborer, sought compensation for injuries sustained at work, claiming a debilitating effect on his ability to earn. However, the initial claim was dismissed by the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act in Karnal, leading to this appeal. The crux of the issue was proving the actual impact of the injury on the claimant's earning capacity as legally required.

Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta scrutinized the lack of evidence in the claimant's argument, pointing out, "The claimant was required to adduce evidence to establish the extent of the loss of his earning capacity... however, he did not lead even an iota of evidence." The court also observed that despite claiming disability, the appellant continued his employment as a laborer, which undermined his claim of significant loss of earning capacity.

Decision: The High Court found the appellant's arguments insufficient to overturn the previous decision. It was held that the claimant failed to meet the necessary legal threshold to prove a substantial loss in earning capacity due to the injury, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.

Date of Decision: March 15, 2024

Ishpal @ Shishpal v. The Commissioner under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, Karnal and another

 

Latest Legal News