R.K. Verma, J.

1. This order shall also govern the disposal of Misc. Appeal No. 46 of 1988, (Saifudddin v. Kalimuddin).

2. The real controversy involved in this case is one of identifying the true employer vis-a-vis the deceased workman, so as to hold him legally liable for compensation under the Act.

3. This is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (herein referred to as 'the Act') filed by the insurance company against the order dated January 18, 1988 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Ujjain in W.C. Case No. 17 of 1983, whereby the learned Commissioner has awarded Rs. 23,100/- as compensation against all the three respondents who have been held to be jointly and severally liable to pay the same and Rs. 4,000/- as penalty against the respondent No. 4 who alone has been held to be liable to pay the same.

4. A cross-objection has been filed in this appeal by Respondent No. 4, Kesuram. A cross-appeal has, however, been filed by the dependent parents of deceased Haidarali for enhancement of penalty amount, viz., Misc. Appeal No. 46 of 1988, (Saifuddin v. Kalimuddin).

5. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follo