SHRI.DILIP KUMAR RAMDAS RASTOGI vs MR.RADHYESHAM ROOPNARAYAN JAISWAL AND ANR. — FA/1199/2017
Case under Workmens Compensation Act Section 30. Next hearing: : -.
CNR: HCBM010283502017
Next Hearing
: -
Filing Number
FA/18438/2017
Filing Date
28-06-2017
Registration No
FA/1199/2017
Registration Date
26-10-2017
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JITENDRA SHANTILAL JAIN
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JITENDRA SHANTILAL JAIN
Bench Type
Single
Category
FIRST APPEAL ( 53 )
Sub-Category
Other Appeals - Single Bench ( 6 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SHRI.DILIP KUMAR RAMDAS RASTOGI
Adv. TJMENDON
Respondent(s)
MR.RADHYESHAM ROOPNARAYAN JAISWAL AND ANR.
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JITENDRA SHANTILAL JAIN
FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS
FOR ORDERS [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]
APPEALS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-04-2019 | FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS |
| 15-12-2020 | FOR ORDERS [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS] |
| 20-11-2019 | APPEALS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS] |
Orders
Case Summary: FA/1199/2017 The Bombay High Court admitted the first appeal on the substantial question of law regarding whether the Commissioner's finding that the appellant failed to prove an employer-employee relationship and was thus ineligible for compensation under the Employees Compensation Act was perverse. The court issued notice to respondents and directed the appellant to file a compiled paper-book within six months, with the appeal to be heard thereafter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: FA/1199/2017 The Bombay High Court admitted the first appeal on the substantial question of law regarding whether the Commissioner's finding that the appellant failed to prove an employer-employee relationship and was thus ineligible for compensation under the Employees Compensation Act was perverse. The court issued notice to respondents and directed the appellant to file a compiled paper-book within six months, with the appeal to be heard thereafter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts