(1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's CompensationAct,1923 arising out of the award of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Surat, in Workmen's Compensation (Fatal) Application No. 8/98 decided on 2nd July, 1997 under which the claimants (respondents herein) were awarded Rs. 73,668/- towards compensation alongwith penalty at the rate of 50% as well as interest at the rate of 12% from the date of application. The facts of the case are that the deceased Jeevanbhai Bhikhabhai was initially appointed as daily wage clerk with effect from 21st October, 1983. Later on he was regularised with effect from 1st October, 1986. It is not in dispute that Jeevanbhai Bhikhabhai has died as a result of accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. The claimants approached the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. Under the impugned award, compensation and penalty as stated above has been awarded to the claimants. Hence this appeal before this Court.
(2.) HEARD the learned Counsels for the parties.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents-claimants vehemently contended that the deceased was driving the road roller earlier to the date of accident. It has further been contended that though the deceased was not appointed as driver of road roller, it is a case where the appellants were taking Work from him as driver of road roller as and when regular driver was absent from his duty. On the fateful day also the regular driver of the road roller was absent and to see that the work may not suffer the deceased was asked to work as driver of road roller. The deceased had a valid licence in his favour to drive road roller. It is an accident arising out of and during the course of his employment and therefore the claimants were entitled to compensation, and the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Surat, has not committed any error, much less jurisdictional error, in awarding compensation, penalty and interest.