V.M. Velumani, J.

This appeal is filed against the order made in W.C. No. 319 of 2001, dated 01.04.2004 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Tiruchirappalli.

2. The appellant Insurance Company is the third respondent in the W.C.No.319 of 2001 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Tiruchirappalli. The respondents 1 to 3 along with one Soundaravalliammal filed the W.C. No. 319 of 2001 claiming a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs as compensation. The fourth respondent is the owner of the omnibus. The fifth respondent is the Manager of S.R.K. Travels. The appellant is the insurer of the omnibus. The Deputy Commissioner for Workmen Compensation awarded a sum of Rs. 2,72,528/- as compensation to respondents 1 to 3 and Soundaravalliammal. Against the said order, dated 1.4.2004, the present appeal has been filed.

The facts of the case :

3. According to the respondents 1 to 3, the deceased was working as driver of the omnibus belonging to the fourth respondent. On 11.12.2000, the deceased was working as driver and drove the omnibus from Trichy to Chennai. While driving the bus, on return trip from Chennai to Trichy, he suffered heart attack and he died at 5.30 a.m. on 12.12.2000. According to the respondents 1 to 3, he died during and in the course of employment due to pressure of work as he was made to drive the bus without any rest. According to the respondents 1 to 3, the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.4,000/- p.m. by way of salary including batta paid to him. The deceased was aged about 39 years at the time of accident. The respondents 1 to 3 and Soundaravalliammal are the legal heirs of the deceased. Therefore they claimed a sum of Rs.3 lakhs as compensation for the death of husband of first respondent and father of respondents 2 and 3 and son of the Soundaravalliammal, now deceased.

4. The fourth respondent owner of the bus remained ex parte before the tribunal.

5. The fifth respondent denied various allegations made against him. He denied that he is the Manager of travels. He is not having any record and he is an unnecessary party to the proceedings.

6. The appellant filed a counter statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. The appellant denied the fact that the deceased died during and in the course of employment. The age, avocation and income were denied. They have also stated that no complaint was lodged with the police and no postmortem was conducted. They have stated that the deceased died due to natural cause. The body of the deceased was hurriedly cremated. At the time of accident, the deceased did not have the valid driving licence. No claim form was submitted either by the respondents 1 to 3 or by the fourth respondent. Therefore, they prayed for dismissal of the claim Petition.

7. Before the Commissioner, the first respondent was examined as P.W.1 and one Sekar, alternate driver who worked with the deceased was examined as P.W.2. Nine documents were marked as Ex.P1 to P9. The appellant examined one Kumarananthan (Senior Clerk) as R.W.1 and marked three documents as Ex.R1 to Ex.R3.

8. The Deputy Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, considering the pleadings and evidence, came to the conclusion that the deceased died only during and in the course of his employment. The respondents 1 to 3 did not produce any evidence to prove that the deceased was earning Rs.4,000/- p.m. In the circumstances, the Commissioner fixed the salary of the deceased at Rs.2,849/- as per the minimum wages Act. The age of the deceased was 39 years. By applying the formula as contemplated under the ''Act'', he awarded compensation of Rs.2,70,028/-. He further awarded a sum of Rs.2,500/- towards funeral expenses. The Deputy Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Tiruchirappalli, also directed the appellant to pay interest at 12% p.a as per Section 4-A(3) of the Employees Compensation Act as per the Judgement of the Apex Court reported in 1998 ACJ Page 1 [Ved Prakash Garg v. Premi Devi a