HONNIAH, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal arises from the judgment of the Commissioner for Workmen's compensation Bangalore, passed in case No. PC 41|64 awarding compensation of Rs. 9,000 to the claimants respondents herein on account of the death of Abdul Rahaman their husband. ( 2 ) THE only question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether compensation awarded by the Commissioner is in accordance with law. Abdul Rahaman was an employee of the Hindustan Aeronautics ltd. , Bangalore, and had been deputed to work in Kashmir. While returning back to Bangalore in an aircraft, due to air crash he died on 21-10-1963. In September 1963 he drew a basic salary of Rs. 130; Dearness allowance Rs. 20; Over-time Allowance of Rs. 88. 81; Out-station allowance of Rs. 120, and Ration Allowance of Rs. 30. On his death, his two wives filed an application before the Commissioner claiming compensation of Rs. 10,000 on the basis that he was getting a salary of Rs. 450 per month The Commissioner after taking evidence, was of the view that except ration allowance, all other amounts Abdul Rahaman was gettins prior to his death, should be considered as wages within the meaning of S. 2 (m) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, and on that basis awarded compensation of Rs. 9,000. ( 3 ) THERE is no dispute that if Out-station Allowance and Over-time allowance that he was getting are included in the computation of wages within the meaning of the definition under the Act, the amount awarded by the Commissioner is correct. It is argued by Mr. Chandrashekhar on behalf of the employer that Out-station allowance and Over-time allowance ought not to have been taken into consideration while computing the wages under the Act. The expression "wages" is defined under S. 2 (1) (m) of the Act as follows:"'wages' include any privileges or benefit which is capable of being estimated in money other than a travelling allowance or the value of any travelling concession or a contribution paid by the employer of a workman towards any pension or provident fund or a sum paid to a workman to cover any sppcial expenses entailed on him by the nature of his employment. " ( 4 ) MR Chandrashekhar contended that Over-time allowance and Out-station allowance come within the category of "special expenses entailed on him by the nature of his employment". " ( 4 ) MR Chandrashekhar contended that Over-time allowance and Out-station allowance come within the category of "special expenses entailed on him by the nature of his employment". We are unable to accept this contention Over-time allowance and Out-station allowance are the privilege or benefit which the employee was entitled to get for working beyond specified hours and for his work at out-station. The two items squarely come within the definition of wages, they having nothing to do with the nature of the employment The Workmen's Compensation Act is a piece of ameliorative legislation and even if there is any doubt, it must be resolved in favour of the workmen rather than in favour of the employer. The definition extracted above makes it abundantly clear that the two items which are disputed by the employer, clearly come within the first part of the definition of wages, they being previlege or benefit depending upon the place of work and number of hours of work. In this view, we find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Commissioner. In the result, this appeal fails and it is dismissed with costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 200. --- *** --- .