Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J. - (1.) The Divisional Director of Social Forestry has challenged the judgment and decree granting a sum of Rs.1,00,219/- @ 6% in favour of Smt. Sarbati Devi and the deceased, according to the State, died during the course of employment but was killed due to enmity.
(2.) It is stated that the claimant was not entitled to compensation as the deceased died due to personal enmity. The F.I.R. does not show anything which is alleged before this Court.
(3.) This is the question of fact and not of law. The Apex Court recently in Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. Vs. Divisional Manager and Another, 2017 1 TAC 259 (SC) and this High Court in FAFO 1070 of 1993 (E.S.I.C. Vs. S. Prasad) decided on 26.10.2017 has held as follows: "The grounds urged before this Court are in the realm of finding of facts and not a question of law. As far as question of law is concerned, the aforesaid judgment in Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. Versus Divisional Manager and another in paragraph 8 holds as follows "the Workman Compensation Commissioner is the last authority on facts. The Parliament has thought it fit to restrict the scope of the appeal only to substantial questions of law, being a welfare legislation. Unfortunately, the High Court has missed this crucial question of limited jurisdiction and has ventured to re-appreciate the evidence and recorded its own findings on percentage of disability for which also there is no basis.";