S. Talapatra, J.

1. Heard Mr. S.S. Sharma, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. K.K. Bhatta, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant.

Identical substantial questions of law have been projected in both the appeals. Apart that these appeals have emerged from the same accident which occurred on 22.8.2004. As such, the appeals are taken up together for disposal by a common judgment.

These appeals filed under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 against the judgment and award dated 30.8.2004 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Tinsukia in W.C. Case No. 96 of 2004 and W.C. Case No. 95 of 2004.

2. At the time of admission no substantial question of law was formulated as required under section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. However, from the memorandum of appeal, it appears that the following substantial questions of law are involved in these appeals:

1. Whether the wages of the workmen would include the daily allowance, and

2. Whether the interest shall accrue from the date of the judgment and award @ 12% per annum or from the date when it fell due as per section 3 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 or whether there can be higher