- (1.) THIS appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 is directed against the judgment and award dated 17-9-1996 passed by the learned Workmen's Compensation Commis sioner/ Dy. Labour Commissioner, Kumaon Region, Haldwani (Nainital) (for short Commissioner,) in W. C. A. No. 26 of 1995, Ali Sher Vs. M/s Pal Stone Crusher and others, whereby compensa tion of Rs. 1,01,349/-, interest for three years @ 6"%, i. e. Rs. 20,776-54 and penalty of Rs. 15. 000/-, total Rs. 1,37,125-54, was awarded in favour of the workman-respondent against the ap pellant-Insurance Company,
(2.) RELEVANT facts of the case are that the claimant-respondent AH Sher filed a claim petition before the learned Commissioner alleging that on 23-3-1993 due to accidental injuries in the course of his employment under the M/ s Pal Stone crusher, he sustained inju ries with the result he became perma nently incapacitated. The workman al leged his age about 19 years and income Rs. 1. 000/- per month. Claim petition was preferred for compensation of Rs. 2,02,698/- against the employer and the insurance company. The employer filed its written statement and admitted the case of the claimant on material aspect. In the additional pleas, it was eon-tended that the workmen of the em ployer are insured with the insurance company and the information of the accident was given to the insurer, there fore, the Insurance Company is liable for the payment of compensation if any. However, it was contended that the claim petition is defective for non-join der of insurance company. The Insurance Company was impleaded as party and it also filed its written statement and contested the case asserting that the workman suffered no injury in the course of his employ ment and he was not under the employ ment of the employer firm. It was pleaded that the claim has been pre ferred on wrong facts. The claimant filed documentary evidence. The learned Commissioner re corded the evidence led by the claimant as well as opposite parties, heard them and after perusing the evidence on record found that on the basis of the disability certificate issued by the medi cal authority, the claimant suffered 90% M disability. It was also found that the in juries were caused to the claimant in the course of his employment. The factum of accident was admitted by the. em ployer. Ultimately, learned Commis sioner on the basis of evidence led by the parties has held that the claimant was entitled to compensation of Rs. 1,01,349, interest @ 6% for three years Rs. 20. 776. 54p and penalty. of Rs. 15,000/-, total Rs. 1,37,125-54 payable by the Insurance Company as men tioned in the impugned order.
(3.) THE main controversy to be de termined in this appeal is whether the appellant could be held liable to pay the interest and the penalty to the claimant. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant at length and perused the record. The employer- respondent no. 2 and the claimant were sufficiently served but none came forward to argue the ap peal on behalf of the respondents.;