- (1.) HEARD Shri Sishodia, for the appelant.
(2.) INITIALLY, the learned counsel has raised two submissions - (1) that the learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner committed an error in calculation in awarding compensation, which was given up subsequently when the learned counsel realised that no error was committed by the Commissioner, as per the Schedule to the Act. The second submission was raised by the learned counsel regarding awarding penalty at the rate of 25 percent. He submitted that the learned Commissioner. ought not to have awarded penalty as, much before the filing of the application for compensation the appellant had deposited the compensation amount and, therefore, it cannot be said that his conduct was such which would call for the penalty.
(3.) BEFORE appreciating the second submission made by learned counsel, few facts are required to be stated. The accident took place on August 15, 1990 and the application for compensation was filed by the claimants before the Commissioner on November 29. 1991. Before that, the appellant had deposited the compensation amount to the tune of Rs. 83, 182/- on July 10, 1991. It was also argued and averred in the memo of appeal that much before that the appellant tried to deposit the said amount of compensation by way of Demand Draft on May 3, 1991 but learned Commissioner refused to accept the same and orally asked the appellant to pay the said amount in cash which was in turn paid in cash on July 10, 1991. Therefore, in short the submission was that there was no deliberate delay on the part of the appellant in depositing the compensation amount.;