- (1.) Heard Sri A.K. Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant. No one appears on behalf of the respondents despite the notice being sent.
(2.) The short submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that by the impugned order a sum of Rs.29,196/- has been levied towards penalty and the appellant has been held liable to pay the same. He submitted that under Section 4A of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), the penalty cannot be levied without giving reasonable opportunity to the employer to show cause, as contemplated under the proviso of Section 4A (3) of the Act, while, from perusal of the order, it is apparent that no notice has been issued. He further submitted that the penalty is leviable on the employer for committing default and the insurer is only liable to indemnify the amount of compensation and not the penalty.
(3.) Reliance is placed on on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ved Prakash Garg and others Vs. Premi Devi and others, 1998 1 TAC 215.;