Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) Under challenge is the judgment and award dated 3.10.2018 passed by the Employees Compensation Commissioner holding owner of Truck No. RJ-14-GB-0721 and the appellant - Insurance Co. which had insured the said truck liable for compensation to the LRs of Sita Ram, deceased driver of the insured vehicle involved in an accident.
(2.) The first proviso to section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 (hereafter referred to 'the Act of 1923') inter-alia provides that no appeal shall lie against any judgment passed under the Act of 1923 unless a substantial question of law is involved in the appeal.
(3.) The only substantial question of law agitated in the course of hearing of this appeal by Mr. Virendra Agarwal was that when both claimants and insured failed to produce before the Commissioner the driving license of the deceased Sita Ram who was driving the insured vehicle at the time of accident, it amounted to willful breach of fundamental terms and conditions of insurance policy - in cross hair of section 134(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Act of 1988) , for reason of which no liability could be fastened on the Insurance Co. And in so yet doing the Commissioner has committed a gross perversity and patent illegality.;