Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J. - (1.) The only ground urged in this appeal is relating to penalty.
(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that insurance company was not at fault, as the claimant before the workmen compensation authority was not employee of insured. Respondent No. 2 i.e. the owner of the vehicle has categorically accepted that the deceased was employed with him and therefore, the submission of the insurance company that he was not employed cannot be sustained.
(3.) The insurance company with whom the vehicle was insured would have primary liability to indemnify the employer as determined by the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation Ac, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1923) as per provision of Section 19(1) of Act, 1923. Thus, it cannot be said that the insurance company has no liability to indemnify the employee, who was employed by a person, whose vehicle was insured by the insurance company.;