SUNIL KUMAR GARG, J. - (1.) THE above appeals are being decided by this common judgment as both of them have been preferred against the award dated 30.9.1995 passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Jodhpur.
(2.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellants against the award dated 30.9.1995 passed by the learned Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Jodhpur whereby the learned Commissioner directed the respondent No. 3 National Insurance Company Ltd. to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 88,548/- to the appellants and also directed respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to pay Rs. 22,580/- as interest to the appellants. It arises in the following circumstances: (i) The appellants of this appeal filed a claim under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1923) against the respondents on 31.3.1992 alleging inter alia that the deceased Award Ram was driver of Truck No. RRN 5343 which was owned by respondent Nos. 1 Amrit Lal and respondent No. 2 Ummed Ram and that truck was insured with respondent No. 3 (National Insurance Company Ltd.). Oh 12.6.1991, the said truck was proceeding towards Satlana and when it reached the Railway Crossing, an accident took place as a result of which Awad Ram died and at the time of death/ the age of Awad Ram was 22 years and the present appellant claimants are dependents of the deceased, it was further stated in the claim petition that at the time of accident, the deceased was getting Rs. 1,500/- as salary and he was in the employment of respondent No. 1 Amrit Lal and respondent No. 2 Ummed Ram and, therefore, they claimed Rs. 1,32,882/- as compensation from tile respondents. (ii) The respondents filed reply to the claim petition filed by the present appellants and it was admitted by the respondents that the truck in question was insured with respondent No. 3..(National Insurance Company). (iii) That the learned Commissioner framed as many as 11 issues and thereafter after recording evidence and hearing the parties, the learned Commissioner decided all the issues inter alia holding- (1) That the deceased Awad Ram was in the employment of respondent No. 1 Amrit Lal and respondent No. 2 Ummed Ram as driver of truck No. RRN 5343. (2) That at the time of accident, the truck in question was being driven by the deceased Awad Ram and at that time, he was in the employment of respondent No. 1 Amrit Lal and respondent No. 2 Ummed Ram. (3) That at the time of death, the deceased was getting Rs. 1,500/- per month as salary from respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and he was 22 years of age. (4) That the deceased was having valid licence at the time of accident. (5) That the present appellants are dependents of the deceased. (6) That the truck in question was insured with respondent No. 3 (National Insurance Company Limited). (7) That the learned Commissioner came to the conclusion that the present appellant-claimants were entitled to Rs. 88,548/- as compensation from the respondents along with interest @ 6% from the date of accident. So far as interest was concerned, it was ordered by the learned Commissioner that the interest was to be paid only by respondent No. 1 Amrit Lal and respondent No. 2 Ummed Ram and not by the Insurance Company. (8) That Rs. 22,580/- were ordered to be paid as interest to the appellants within sixty days.
(3.) AGGRIEVED from the award dated 30.9.1995, this appeal has been preferred j by the present appellant-claimants and their main contention is that while deciding issue No. 10, the learned Commissioner did not order for penalty which was mandatory arid, therefore, the award dated 30.9.1995 be modified and be enhanced to Rs. 44,274/-. The learned Counsel for the present appellants has placed reliance on Section 4A of the Act of 1923 and has further placed reliance on a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Shrinivas Sabata.;