Bela M.Trivedi, J. - (1.) THE present appeal has been filed by the appellant -Insurance Company under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), challenging the award dated 28.5.01 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Sikar (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner') in Claim Case No. WCAA/F2/98, whereby the Commissioner has awarded Rs. 2,33,350/ - by way of compensation to the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 -claimants for the death of Shri Banwari Lal. Heard the learned counsel Mr. Prateek Kasliwal for the appellant. None is present for the respondents though the appeal has been called out twice for hearing.
(2.) THE short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the deceased Banwari Lal happened to be the husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondent No. 2 and son of the respondent No. 3. The said respondents -claimants had filed the claim petition before the Commissioner claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 8,00,000/ - under the said Act for the death of the said Banwari Lal, who had expired on 17.4.94 while he was driving the Truck No. RJ -19 G -0849 and met with the accident. According to the concerned respondents -claimants, the said truck belonged to the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and was insured with the appellant -Insurance Company. The Commissioner after appreciating the evidence on record awarded the compensation as stated hereinabove. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant -Insurance Company. The learned counsel Mr. Prateek Sharma appearing for the appellant has drawn the attention of the court to the relevant provision of Section 4 of the Workmen's Compensation Act and submitted that when the monthly wages of the workman exceeded Rs. 2,000/ -, the monthly wages for the purposes of clause (a) and (b) of Section 4 was required to be taken as Rs. 2,000/ - only, in view of the Explanation -II to Section 4 of the said Act. According to him the Commissioner has committed an error of law apparent on the face of record by awarding the compensation, taking the monthly wages of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/ -, in place of Rs. 2,000/ - and, therefore, the award is bad to the said extent.
(3.) IN order to appreciate the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, it would be beneficial to reproduce the relevant Section 4 as it stood at the relevant time when the accident in question took place. The same reads as under: - - 4. Amount of compensation - -(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the amount of compensation shall be as follows, namely: (a) where death results from the injury: an amount equal to fifty per cent of the monthly wages of the deceased workman multiplied by the relevant factor; or an amount of twenty thousand rupees, whichever is more; xxxx xxxxx xxxx Explanation -I xxx xxxx xxxx Explanation -II - - Where the monthly wages of a workman exceed two thousand rupees, his monthly wages for the purposes of clause(a) and clause (b) shall be deemed to be two thousand rupees only.;