The main legal point established in the judgment is that the insurance company is liable to meet the awards of the Workmen's Commissioner imposing penalty and interest against the insured employer under section 4A(3) of the Compensation Act. However, the insurance company cannot be made liable to reimburse the penalty amount imposed on the employer due to the employer's own fault and negligence.

This order shall also govern the disposal of M. A. No. 1153/2010; 1159/2010 and 1161/2010 along with above appeal, as all of them arise from the common Award of the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation. They involve common facts and question of law therefore we may briefly state the facts necessary for disposal of all appeals.

2. On 14-3-2006, two persons, viz. Mahendra and Sukhlal died in an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. They were employed as Khalasi on the truck belonging Manjeetsingh. On the fateful day the truck was insured with respondent No. 4. According to claim petitions, deceased were young men getting wages of Rs. 100/- per day.

3. The Commissioner for Workmen Compensation adjudicated upon their claim and awarded a Sum of Rs. 3,34,065/- as compensation for death of Mahendra and Rs. 3,36,000/- for death of Sukhlal. Learned Commissioner considering the Insurance Policy found that the aforesaid amount of compensation would be recoverable from the owner and Insurance Company jointly and severally. In addition to compensation, learned Commissioner also directed the employer (Manjeetsingh) to pay on the computed amount 12% simple interest from the date of accident and also 50% penalty within one month under section 4A of the Act. Claimants and employer both are aggrieved only by this part of the direction, hence these four appeals : two by claimants and two by employer.

4. There is no factual controversy in these appeals. Consequently, there is no difficulty in affirming the findings of the Commissioner for Workmen that on the fateful day Mahendra and Sukhlal both met with in an accident arising out of and died in the course of their employment while working on truck belonging to appellant Manjeetsingh. The Truck was insured with respondent No. 4 and the "Insurance Policy" had covered the statutory risk of two workmen. Learned Commissioner for Workmen computed the amount of compensation and directed the same would be recoverable jointly and severally from the owner and insurance company of the truck. Learned Commissioner also found that provision of section 4A were attracted to the facts of the case, therefore, directed appellant (owner of the Truck) alone to pay 12% simple interest from the date accident and also to pay 50% penalty within a month. Owner of the vehicle as well claimant want the burden to comply with this direction should also be thrown on the shoulders of the Insurance Company. This is vehemently opposed by the Insurance Company and it was submitted that Insurance Company was not liable to any further amount.

5. In the facts and circumstances of the case in hand, the question that arises for our consideration is "Where an employee dies in a motor accident arising out of and in the course of his employment while working on the motor vehicle of the employer, whether the insurance company is liable to meet the awards of Workmen's Commissioner imposing penalty and interest against the insured employer under section 4A(3) of the Compensation Act?"

6. During the course of their respective submissions, learned counsel took us through the entire record. Learned counsel for employer and claimants in unison submitted that Commissioner for Workmen Compensation committed illegality in holding that Insurance Company was not liable to pay interest and penalty under section 4A of the Act. On other hand learned counsel for Insurance Company while supporting the Order of the Commissioner submitted that there is no substance in appeals and they deserve to be dismissed.

7. Before we embark upon this enquiry, it will be necessary to keep in view the relevant statutory schemes in the light of which this controversy has to be resolved. The Compensation Act deals with the provisions for payment by certain classes of employers to their workmen of compensation for employment injuries caused by accident. There is no dispute between the parties that the deceased in these cases were workmen employed by