(ii) APPEAL

• An appeal against the order of the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act lies only when a substantial question of law is involved.
Nissan Springs Pvt. Ltd. v. Om Jain, (1990) 1 LLN 4410 1990 LLR 93,1989(59) FLR 788 (MP He) and Raveendran v. Somavally, (1995) 2 KLT 125, (1995) 87 FIR 369, (1995) 2 KLI 139, 1995 LLR 903 (Ker He).

• An appeal against the order of the Commissioner under the Act will lie within 60 days from the date of order and not from the date of its communication.
Kap Steel Ltd. v. R. Sasikala, 1990 LIC 1144, (1989) Kant 3098, 1991 LLR 31: 1991 (62) FLR 638: 1992-1 LLl61 (Ker He).

• Appeal by Insurance Company without deposit of compensation with Commissioner - Non-compliance of pre-condition of deposit - Appeal by Insurer - If competent? Yes.
New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Manorama Sabu, (1993) 2 ACj 930: 1993 LLR 982: 1993-1I LLI 332 (Ori HC).

• Appeal by Insurer - Maintainability of - Against the order of Commissioner ¬Without filing certificate of the Commissioner about depositing of amount of compensation as awarded - Whether maintainable? No.
United India Insurance Company v. Kashimasab, 1993 LLR 794 (Kar He).

• No appeal will be lie when the liability pertaining to death of an employee due to a accident is admitted.
National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Kiran Devi, (1996) 1 BLjR 323, (1998) III LLI (Supp) 622: 1996 LLR 559 (Pat He).

• An appeal against the order of Compensation Commissioner will not lie pertaining to the fact whether the respondent was an employee of owner of the truck travelling in which he was injured.
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Maku Mabakul Khan, 1997 LIC 2730 (Ori He).

• Letter Patent appeal before the Division Bench will not be maintainable when the Single Judge has already given the decision.
Chhaya Rani v. Dhan Devi alias Dhan Dei, 1998 LIC 357: 1997 (45) 2 RLR 1561: 1998 (78) FLR 267 (Pat He).

• A question whether an injury has occurred to a workman during the course of employment and arisen out of employment is a substantial question of law for filing an appeal against the Award of the Compensation Commissioner.
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Banga/ore v. Vasantha Pitamber Hundre, (1999) ill LLJ (Supp) 442: 1997 LIC 2561 (Kar HC).

• Deposit of amount awarded by Compensation Commissioner as compensation for filing an appeal will be mandatory for the employer and not for the Insurance Company.
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Bangalore v. Vasantha Pitamber Hundre, (1999) III LLJ (Supp) 442: 1997 LIC 2561 (Kar HC).

• Section 30 of the Workmens' Compensation Act empowers the Appellate Court to interfere with the findings recorded by the Commissioner only in case of substantial error of law.
Traffic Manager, New Mangalore Port Trust (Regd) Cargo Handling Worker's Admn. Wing. v. Radha B, 1998 LIC 2316: (1998) 3 LLN 269: 1998 II LLj (Karn HC).

• Delay in filing appeal against the order of Workmen's Compensation Commissioner cannot be condoned.
Bipin H. Doshi v. Jawaharlal Prajapati, (1998) 83 FLR 525: (1999) 3 LLN 935: 1999 LLR 1219 (Born HC).

• In the absence of proof of depositing compensation for accident, appeal will not lie in High Court.
New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Kartar Singh, 2001 LIC 1614: (2001) 1 CLR 13: 2001 LLR 773 (P&H HC).

• Only appeal not writ petition lies when employer challenges the order of Compensation Commissioner.
1. National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Krishna Sapa/ya, (2002) 1 Kant L] 269: (2002) 1 LLR 587: 2002 LLR 127 (Kam He).
2. P. MJ1rinppan v. Deputy Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Palayamkottai, 2002 LLR 246 (Mad HC).
3. Chellappan v. Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation & Dy. lAbour Commissioner, Kattayam, (2002) 94 FLR 1213: (2002) IV LL] Supp 1196 (NOC): 2002 LLR 1190 (Ker HC).
4. Soil Conseroation Department, Damodar Valley Corporation, Hazaribagh v. Sudan Sao, 2003 LLR 66 (]har HC).

• An appeal against the order of Compensation Commissioner will lie when there is substantial question of law.
1. Oriental Insurance Company v. Mohammed, 2002 LLR 271 (Ker HC).
2. United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Chandra Kali, 2002 LLR 1184: 2002 "LIC 3584: 2002 (95) FLR 50: 2003-1 LL] 124: 2003-1 LLN 19 (All HC).

• An appeal without depositing of compensation as awarded under Workmen's Compensation Act will not be tenable.
New India Assurance Company Ltd., Allahabad v. Jogendra Kaur, 2002 LLR 1019 (All HC). • An insurer is also liable to deposit amount of compensation for accident before filing the appeal.
United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Chandra Kali, 2002 LLR 1184: 2002 LIC 3584: 2002 (95) FLR 50: 2003-1 LLj 124: 2003-1 LLN 19 (All HC).

• In the absence of substantial question of law an appeal will not be tenable when the Compensation Commissioner has awarded compensation based on the evidence.
c.c. Ltd. v. Bhim Yadav, 2003 LLR 574: 2003 (97) FLR 267 Ghar HC).

• An appeal against the award of the Compensation Commissioner lies only when there is a question of law and not of fact.
Kendu Leaves, Athamallick v. Chaitanya Sahu, 2003 LLR 799: 2003 (97) FLR 1089 (Ori HC). • An appeal will not lie against the order of Compensation Commissioner holding that there was no wilful disobedience on the part of the workman since such a plea pertains to fact and not law.
S.E. Railways v. P. Adinarayana, 2003 LLR 1024: 2003 (98) FLR 820 (Ori HC).

• An appeal against the order of the Compensation Commissioner will not lie in the High Court when it pertains to factual and not a law point.
N.E.K.R. T.C., Bellary v. Marembess, 2004 LLR 33 (Karn HC)

• An appeal will not be against the order of the Compensation Commissioner by assessing the loss of earning capacity of a workman in awarding compensation as such there is no need to produce any certificate by the workman whose hand was crushed and one of his fingers was amputated.
loginder Sain and Bros. v. Man Mohan Singh, (2004) 101 FLR 161: (2004) 1 CLR 855: 2004 LLR 235: 109 (2004) DLT 177 (Del HC).

• High Court will not interfere in the findings of the Compensation Commissioner holding that the accident has arisen during the course of employment.
Kothari Group of Financiers v. Sri K. Muralidhar, (2004) 101 FLR 1102: 2004 LIC 1802: (2004) 3 ALD 68: 2004 LLR 617 (AP HC).

• Workman's income cannot be termed as 'substantial question of law' for maintainability of appeal in High Court.
National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Bhima Marandi @ Majhi, 2004 LLR 919 (Ori HC).

• The definition of 'employer' under the Act clearly indicates that it is inclusive and not exclusive, hence Insurance Company on appeal must deposit the awarded amount.
New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Neeru Dabur, 2005 LLR (SN) 303 (All HC).

• An award of the Compensation Commissioner, granting compensation to a driver dieing of heart attack, will not be interfered by the High Court.
New India Assurance Company Ltd., Namakkal v. Sarasu, 2005 LLR 975 (Mad HC).

• The award of the Compensation Commissioner, awarding compensation to the dependants of the deceased working as a security incharge and met with an accident outside the factory premises, will not be interfered in appeal.
Managing Director, Badamba Coop. Sugar Industries Ltd., Cuttack v. Bimala Routray, 2005 LLR 1002 (Ori HC).

• The award of the Compensation Commissioner, allowing compensation to the dependents of the driver died in an accident while crossing the road for taking supper, will not be interfered in appeal.
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Santhi, 2005 LLR 1066 (Mad HC).

• In appeal, High Court will not interfere with the finding of facts as analyzed by Compensation Commissioner.
Executive Engineer, Padagada Dam Division v. Ghann. Swain, 2006 LLR 1234 (Ori He).

• Under Workmen's Compensation Act, an appeal shaUlie only on a question of Naveen Transport Company v. Presiding Officer, Lnbour Court Bakara, 2008 LLR 389 Qhar HC).

• Condonation of delay by Compensation Commissioner does not involve question of law in appeal.
Union of India v. Dhara Singh, 2008 LLR 748 (Raj HC).

• No appeal will lie when Compensation Commissioner has the denial of employer about employer-employee relationship.
Adithya Fera Alloys, Thirunallar v, Additional Commissioner Authority under Workmen's Compensation Act, Karaikal District, 2008 LLR 815 (Mad He).

• Award of Compensation Commissioner, granting compensation to a casual worker, is not to be interfered.
Delhi Jal Board v. Nayanga Singh, 2008 LLR 960 (Del HC).

• Depositing of compensation as awarded and not the interest will be imperative for filing an appeal.
Mis Indo Aromatic Pvt. Ltd. v. Sarvesh Devi, 2008 LLR 910 (All He).

• In an appeal against order of Compensation Commissioner, High Court has very limited powers pertaining to errors of law.
Indian Iron and Steel Company Ltd. v. Bhim Mnya Chettri, 2009 LLR 46 (Cal He).