JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

1. This Appeal from Order has been filed challenging the order dated 10.9.2014 passed by Workmen Compensation Commissioner/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamoli in Workmen Compensation Case No. 06 of 2014 "Smt. Swari Devi and others v. Shri Anil Kumar Agarwal and others".

2. This Appeal is heard on the following substantial questions of law:

"1. Whether any interest can be awarded to the claimants when no notice as is required under section 10 of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 has been given?

2. Whether the Workmen Compensation Commissioner further failed to exercise jurisdiction by calculating the amount of compensation on the monthly income of Rs.8000/-, when in the pleading, the case of the claimant was that the income of the deceased is Rs.6,000/- per month?"

3. Mr. Nandan Singh was employed as Driver with Mr. Anil Kumar Agarwal (respondent No. 4 herein). On 22.10.2010, while Driving Max Pick-up, bearing No. UK12 CB 0139 belonging to respondent No. 4, from Kotdwar to Haldwani, the Max Pick-up collided with Tractor No. UP57E3279. As a result of the collision, Mr. Nandan Singh sustained grievous injuries and he succumbed to his injuries the same day i.e. 22.10.2010. He was survived by his widow Smt. Swari Devi and two minor children, namely, Yogendra and Km. Mamta. The widow and two minor children of late Nandan Singh filed an application under Employees' Compensation Act before the Commissioner asserting that late Nandan Singh was getting Rs.6,000/- per month as wages with Rs.50/- per day as diet money from his employer and was earning a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month from agriculture. It was stated by the claimants that the age of the deceased workman was 28 years at the time of death and further that he was an employee of respondent No. 4 and he died during the course of employment. The owner of Max Pick-up, Insurer of Max Pick-up and Driver of the Tractor were made party to the said application. The owner filed his Written Statement, in which he admitted the accident and also the fact that deceased was his employee. He further stated that since the vehicle was insured with National Insurance Company Ltd., therefore, liability, if any, is that of the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company denied the averments made in the Claim Petition for want of knowledge and further contended that there is collusion between the claimants and the owner of the vehicle.

4. Learned Commissioner framed as many as five issues, which are as follows:

"1. Whether Nandan Singh died on 22.10.2010 during the course of employment as Driver in Max Pick-up UK12CB0139 belonging to Mr. Anil Kumar Agarwal? If yes, then its effect?

2. Whether on the date of death, age of Nandan Singh was 28 years? If not, then its effect?

3. Whether the owner of the vehicle was paying Rs.6,000/- per month as salary and Rs.50/- as diet money to deceased Nandan Singh? If not, then amount of salary?

4. Whether on the date of accident all the documents, including Driving License of the Driver of the vehicle, were valid? If not, then its effect?

5. Whether the claimants are entitled to compensation? If yes, then what amount and from which respondent."

5. Claimants produced documentary evidence to substantiate their claim. Widow of the deceased was examined as witness on behalf of the claimants. The owner of the vehicle also deposed before learned Commissioner. After considering the entire evidence on record, learned Commissioner decided all the issues in favor of the claimants.

6. Regarding issue No. 1, finding was recorded that death of Nandan Singh occurred during the course of employment. Regarding issue No. 2, a finding was recorded that age of the deceased at the time of accident was 28 years, which was based on the entry made in the Family Register, copy whereof was produced by the claimants before the Commissioner. On issue No. 3, a finding was recorded that, in view of S.O.R. dated 31.5.2010 issued by the Central Government, monthly wages for the p