This appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 is preferred by United India Insurance Company Ltd. challenging the Judgment and award dated 21.6.2003 passed by the W.C. Commissioner, Kamrup, Guwahati in W.C Case No.82 of 2002.

2. By that judgment and award, the W.C. Commissioner, directed the insurance company to make payment of Rs.1,45,195/- to the claimant within 30 days from the date of order failing which interest @ 9 % per annum of the awarded amount has been directed.

3. Dimbeswar Das as claimant approached the W.C. Commissioner, Guwahati at Ulubari stating that he was employed as conductor in vehicle No. AMK-8456 owned by Sabitri Bala Das. On 19.10.2001, while he was driving vehicle from Mandia towards Barpeta, it met with an accident at about 3.30 pm on being hit by another bus from the backside. As a result of the accident, he fell down on the front portion of the bus and sustained fracture injury on his left hand. He also sustained serious injury on his head, chest and left thigh apart from injuries on various other parts of the body. He was immediately taken to Barpeta Civil Hospital. X-Ray examination was held. It was found that he had suffered fracture to left radius bone and had to undergo treatment for long time. Because of the accident, he cannot do work with his left hand and is unable to discharge duties as conductor of any bus. The owner of the vehicle did not make payment of any compensation to him and so he made a prayer for appropriate compensation.

4. The owner opposite party No.1 appeared and submitted written statement admitting employment of the claimant as conductor of the vehicle. The owner also admitted that there was an accident on 19.10.2001. The owner also admitted that the claimant was being paid Rs.4200/- towards monthly salary. The opposite party No.2 filed written statement denying the case of the claimant and prayed that claimant’s case be dismissed.

5. Claimant examined himself as PW-1 and adduced Exhibits-1 and 2 prescription. Exhibit-3 is the X-Ray report and Exhibit-4 is the medical certificate. Police report was exhibited as Exhibit-5 whereas Exhibit-6 is the policy document. PW-1 proved conductor license as Exhibit-7. According to him, he was 33 years of age at the time of the accident and that he was drawing Rs.4200/- as monthly salary. This witness was duly cross examined by the insurance company when he stated that he used to get Rs.600/- as monthly salary and Rs.120/- as daily allowance.

6. The claimant examined Dr. SC Sharma as PW-2 who stated that on 19.10.2001 he had examined the claimant and found three injuries on his persons. Injury -1 is a contusion on left forehead, injury No.2 is contusion in the right parietal and Injury-3 is a contusion on the right thigh. According to him, injury No.1 is grievous resulting in 40% physical disability. Because of the disability, the claimant had lost earning capacity to the tune of 30%. The doctor was cross examined at length but no fatal contradiction could be elicited from his mouth.

7. Considering the evidence on record, the W.C. Commissioner arrived at the finding that the claimant was engaged as conductor in the vehicle involved in the accident and that the vehicle was covered by valid insurance of the opposite party No.2. It is the finding of the W.C. Commissioner that the workman was being paid Rs.4200/- as monthly salary and that he lost earning capacity to the tune of 30%. Accepting his age to be 32 years, the W.C. Commissioner made assessment of compensation as follows:-

60% of Rs.4000/- x 201.66 x 30% = Rs.1,45,195.20 which is rounded off to Rs.1,45,195.00.

8. W.C. Commissioner directed the insurance company to make deposit of the amount within a period of 30 days failing which interest @ 9 % per annum has been imposed. This judgment and award passed on 21.6.2003 has been brought under challenged under section of 30 of the W.C. Act., 1923.

9. This court while admitting this appeal on 26.2.2007 framed the