IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.4564 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (c) No. 26004 of 2008)

Jaswinder Singh           ..Appellant

VERSUS

M/s The Oriental Insurance  Co. Ltd. And Anr.              ..Respondents

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against an Appellate order dated 28th of   July, 2008 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at   

Chandigarh in FAO No. 3851 of 2007, whereby the High Court   

has allowed the appeal of Respondent No. 1 and set aside the   

order of the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, awarding  

compensation of Rs. 58,296/- for the injuries suffered and the   

claim petition filed by the respondent No. 1 under the Workmen  

Compensation Act  (hereinafter  referred to as “the Act”)  was   

rejected.   

3. Feeling aggrieved, the claimant/appellant has come up to this   

Court by way of a Special Leave Petition, which on grant of   

leave,  was  heard  in  presence  of  the  learned counsel  for  the  

parties.   

1

4. During  argument,  a  question  was  raised  whether  the  High  

Court, while allowing the appeal of the Oriental Insurance Co.  

Ltd., which was filed under Section 30 of the Act, had decided   

the same by raising a substantial question of law.   

5. We have  now been informed by  the  learned counsel  for  the  

parties  that  the  amount  of  compensation  awarded  by  the  

Workmen Compensation Commissioner has already been paid  

to  the  appellant.   It  can  also  be  kept  on  record  that  the  

respondent No.1, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., in spite of   

due service, has not come forward to contest the claim of the  

appellant in this appeal.  Considering this fact and the amount   

of  compensation  having been paid  to  the  appellant  and The  

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. had chosen not to appear before us   

to contest the appeal, we are not inclined to interfere with the   

impugned  order  in  the  exercise  of  our  discretionary  power  

under  Article  136  of  the  Constitution.   The  appeal  is  thus  

dismissed.

6. However, the question of law, if any, is kept open to be decided  

in an appropriate case.  There shall be no order as to costs.   

       ………………………………J. [TARUN CHATTERJEE]

New Delhi;        …………………………………………J. July 20, 2009.      [R. M. LODHA]

2