Commissioner appointed under the Act is a Tribunal and not civil court.

M. VENUGOPAL, J.

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the award dated 20.8.2003 passed in W.C. No. 18 of 2002 by the Workmens Compensation Commissioner, Dindigul.

2. The Workmens Compensation Commissioner (Tribunal), Dindigul, after contest on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, has passed an award on 20.8.2003, granting a sum of Rs. 2,14,491/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety One only) as compensation along with interest at 9% p.a from the date of accident till date of payment. The appellant/second respondent, National Insurance Company Ltd,Madurai, has been directed to pay the aforesaid sum within thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of the award.

3. Brief facts of the case are as follows:

(i) The first respondent/claimant has filed the claim petition before the Workmens Compensation Commissioner (Tribunal), Dindigul, inter alia stating that he has been a driver/employee employed by the second respondent as the owner of an auto bearing Registration No. TN-59-J-0954 and that the vehicle has been insured with the appellant/National Insurance Company Ltd., Madurai and that on 7.9.2001 at about 12.00 p.m., (midnight), in the course of his employment as driver with the second respondent/owner has met with an accident and sustained grievous fracture of left leg in three places and cut injury and other multiple grievous injuries all over his body and that he took treatment as an inpatient from 8.9.2001 to 10.9.2001 at the Madurai Government Rajaji Hospital and thereafter, he took treatment as an inpatient in Preethi Hospital from 10.9.2001 to 11.10.2001 and spent Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) towards medical expenses.

(ii) On 7.9.2001 at about 12.00 p.m., the claimant/first respondent/driver in the course of his employment with the second respondent/owner of the auto bearing Registration No. TN-59-J-0954 driving the same near Santhi Nagar Bus stop on the way from Sikkanthar Savadi to Thathaneri in Madurai town and was nearing Santhi Nagar, near Nagajothi Mess, he applied the brake as a result of which the auto got capsized on the side of the road and thus, sustained grievous fracture on his left leg in three places and fracture of left palm and also sustained other injuries all over his body etc., and thereby has suffered a partial permanent disability of 85% and lost his job and therefore claims a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs only) as compensation.

4. The appellant/National Insurance Company has filed the counter mentioning other things that the accident took place due to the negligent act of the first respondent/claimant and therefore, the appellant is not liable to pay any compensation and that the alleged accident on 7.9.2001 was reported to the Police Station on 2.10.2001 after a delay of twenty five days which creates a doubt about the occurrence and that the alleged injuries are not scheduled injuries as per the Workmens Compensation Act and therefore, the percentage of disability should be assessed through the qualified Medical Practitioner and the same should be the subject matter of reference before the Medical Board and therefore prays for dismissal of the claim petition with costs.

5. Before the Workmens Compensation Commissioner (Tribunal), Dindigul, on the side of the claimant/first respondent, witnesses P.W.1 to P.W.3 were examined and Exhibits P-1 to P-15 were marked. On the side of the respondents, no witness was examined and no documents were marked.

6. Dissatisfied with the award passed by the Workmens Compensation Commissioner, in W.C. No. 18 of 2002 dated 20.8.2003, the second respondent/ National Insurance Company, has filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal as an appellant.

7. The following substantial questions of law were framed at the time of admission of this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal:

(1) Whether the Workmens Compensation Commissioner erred in coming to the conclusion that the first respondent had su