[260] Sarifan and Rajjak Kha Coram : Present: PANKAJ J [1] passed by 1923, Nuh. [2] that the com the Employ to penalty f the Commi [3] [4] disposed of 21.01.2025 ‘R. Sharma' IN THE HIGH COURT OF PU AT CHANDIGAR FAO-978 Date of De an and others versus k Khan and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PA Mr. Shivam Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. **** KAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) Claimants are in appeal, aggr d by the Commissioner, under the , Nuh. Counsel appearing on behalf o the compensation already stands awar mployee’s Compensation Act, 1923. T alty for which show cause notice ha ommissioner is already seized of the m In view of the above, the prese All pending miscellaneous ed off. .2025 Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH 978-2021 (O&M) of Decision : 21.01.2025 …Appellants ….Respondents PANKAJ JAIN vocate for Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocat l, aggrieved of order dated 31.01.202 r the Employee’s Compensation Ac ehalf of the appellants does not dispu s awarded in terms of the provisions o . The only claim left is with respe tice has been issued to respondents an the matter. present appeal is dismissed. neous application(s), if any, stand (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No dvocate 01.2020 on Act, ispute sions of respect ents and stands RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.01.22 14:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document