IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 241 OF 2014 The National Insurance Company Ltd. VERSUS Smt. Pushpatai Baburao Gudmalwar and Oth. … Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Prateek S. Jadhav h/f Mr. S. N Parghane None present for respondents ... CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. Dated : September 09, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. The appellant-insurance company has preferred the present appeal under Section 30 of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923, in order to challenge the judgment and award dated 22nd April 2013, passed in E.C.A./01/2012 by the Commissioner under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923, at Nanded. 2. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 had preferred Employees’ Compensation Application No. 1 of 2012, claiming compensation on account of the demise of late Ganesh in an accident suffered during the course of his employment. It is stated that the deceased was drawing a salary of Rs. 7,000/- per month and was aged 22 years at the time of his demise. 3. The respondent-employer admitted the employer-employee relationship and the fact that the deceased was drawing a salary of Rs. Page 1 of 3 2026:BHC-AUG:41654 921 FA 241-2014 7,000/- per month. 4. The learned Commissioner has determined the compensation payable at Rs. 7,94,940/-, accepting the case of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 that the deceased was drawing a salary of Rs. 7,000/- per month and was 22 years old at the time of his demise. 5. The fact of the accident and the employment of the deceased are not in question. The contentions raised in the appeal are that the age and income are not properly proved and, therefore, the computation of compensation is incorrect. 6. The appellant-insurance company did not lead any evidence. Respondent No. 1 had entered the witness box. Respondent No. 3- employer did not conduct the cross-examination of respondent No. 1. A perusal of the judgment would indicate that respondent No. 1 had deposed about the income and age of the deceased in the witness box. She stood the test of cross-examination, and nothing worthwhile to disbelieve her deposition could be extracted during the course of cross-examination by the insurance company. 7. Respondent No. 3-employer also deposed, confirming that the income of the deceased was Rs. 7,000/- per month. Respondent No.3 produced the insurance policy and audit reports of the establishment during his evidence. Page 2 of 3 921 FA 241-2014 8. The learned Commissioner has referred to the post-mortem report, wherein the age of the deceased is recorded as 22 years, as well as the school leaving certificate of the deceased. Thus, there is evidence on record to establish the age of the deceased. 9. As regards the salary, the learned Commissioner has recorded that the salary was not seriously disputed during the course of cross- examination and that respondent No. 3-employer had also stated on oath that the monthly salary drawn by the deceased was Rs. 7,000/- per month. 10. Having regard to the evidence on record and the findings recorded by the learned Commissioner, in the considered opinion of this Court, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in the appeal. The findings with respect to the age and income do not appear to be perverse. Such findings of fact cannot be interfered with in an appeal under Section 30, which has to be entertained only on a substantial question of law. 11. The appeal is therefore dismissed, with no order as to costs. ( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. ) vj gawade/-. Page 3 of 3