1. With the consent of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents, this appeal is being decided finally at the admission stage.

2. Defendant appellant, National Insurance Co. Ltd. has filed the present Civil Misc. Appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act being aggrieved of the judgment and award dated 11.12.2014 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Jaipur District First, Jaipur in Case No.E.C.C.F.35/2012 whereby the claim petition of the claimant respondents has been allowed and an award for Rs.6,57,280/-along with Rs.44,501/- towards medical expenses has been passed along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

3. The facts in narrow compass giving rise to the present appeal are that the claimant respondent Nos.1 to 7 on 5.6.2012 filed a claim petition before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Jaipur District First, Jaipur under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 stating therein that while under the employment of defendant Prem Singh, deceased Radhey Shyam was driving tanker No. HR-55-A-0959. While returning from Tonk to New Delhi on 23.3.2012 due to rash and negligent driving of truck driver of another truck No. RJ-14GA-6786 deceased Radhey Shyam succumbed to injuries. Regarding the accident FIR No.141/2012 was lodged at Police Station Chaksu. It was averred in the claim petition that at the time of death deceased was aged 40 years and was getting Rs.8,000/-per month as salary along with daily allowance @ Rs.100/- per day. The deceased was working under the employment of defendant No.1 and the said tanker was insured with defendant-appellant. Hence, both the defendants are jointly and sevarelly liable for compensation of Rs.8,50,000/-to be paid to the claimants under the various heads along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of accident.

4. Defendant No.1, who is the owner of the tanker, filed written statement and admitted the fact that deceased was employed as driver and was being paid Rs.8,000/- per month as salary. It was stated that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of truck No. RJ-14GA-6786. However, in view of the fact that the vehicle was insured with defendant No.2, he prayed for dismissal of the claim against him.

5. Appellant, defendant No.2 in its written statement stated that on the date of the accident the deceased was not having a valid driving license as at the time of accident the deceased was driving the tanker of crude oil but there was no endorsement in the driving license that he was authorised to drive the vehicle with dangerous and hazardous substances. It was stated that though the accident occurred on 23.3.2012 but the FIR was lodged on 14.4.2012 after a delay of 21 days with no explanation regarding the same. Lastly, it was mentioned that the accident had occurred due to contributory negligence of the deceased. Hence, it was prayed that the claim petition be dismissed.

6. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the court below framed the following issues:-

(1) Whether, on 23.3.2012 the deceased was employed with respondent No.1 as a driver on his tanker No.HR-55A-0959 ?

(2) Whether, the death of deceased took place during the course of his employment under respondent No.1 ?

(3) What would be the effect of written statement of the Insurance Company on grant of compensation to the claimants ?

(4) Whether, the claimants are entitled to get compensation from the respondents ? If yes, how much and from whom ?

(5) Relief.

7. In support of their claim, the claimant respondent Smt. Bal Jyoti filed her affidavit and exhibited as many as 79 documents. Non-claimant, Prem Singh, also filed his affidavit and from the side of the Insurance Company, appellant Devendra Singh Bainsla filed his affidavit.

8. The learned Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation decided all the issues in favour of claimant respondents against the respondent appellant and respondent No.8 vide