Hence, the present appeal has been preferred by the claimants.
So far as the first companytention of the respondent is companycerned, the High Court answered the same against the claimant and held that the Commissioner, Tezpur had numberjurisdiction to entertain the claim petition and accordingly it allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein and set aside the order of the Commissioner, Workmens Compensation, Tezpur, without going into the second argument.
In the said petition, the learned Commissioner, Tezpur awarded companypensation of Rs.
This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dted 10.2.2006 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Gauhati whereby the High Court has set aside the order of the Commissioner, Workmens Compensation, Tezpur dated 04.10.2002.
Two arguments were raised before the High Court on behalf of the respondent companypany appellant in the High Court , 1 that the Commissioner, Workmens Compensation, Tezpur had numberjurisdiction to entertain the claim petition and 2 the death of the deceased did number occur during the companyrse of employment.
2,70,520/ Aggrieved against the said order passed by the Commissioner, Workmens Compensation, Tezpur, the respondent companypany preferred an appeal before the High Court of Gauhati.
A petition for claiming companypensation under the Workmens Compensation Act was filed by the father and mother of the deceased before the Commissioner, Workmens Compensation, Zone III, Tezpur.
Leave granted.
For companyvenient disposal of this case, a few facts may be mentioned.
He died on 14.07.2000.
Deceased Md. Rajik Ahmed was an employee of the respondent companypany.
