For several hearings there was no representation on behalf of the respondents. Today also there is no representation on behalf of the respondents. Hence this court is constrained to hear the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant and pronounce judgment.

2. The order of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Salem in his capacity as Commissioner for Workmens Compensation, dated 11.03.2002, made in W.C.No.23/2000, is the subject matter of challenge in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal preferred under Section 30 of the Workmens Compensation Act, 1923. The first respondent herein was the applicant before the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation in the above said W.C.No.23/2000.

3. contending that he sustained injuries on 11.05.1999 in an accident arising in the course of and out of his employment under the second respondent herein and that the same resulted in amputation of two fingers on his left hand, the first respondent/applicant had prayed for an award directing the second respondent herein, as the employer and the appellant herein as the insurer to pay a sum of Rs.2,50,000/-together with an interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of accident till payment