JUDGMENT 1. - The Workmens Compensation Commissioner. Tonk vide his award dated 31st March, 1990, awarded a sum of Rs. 83,293/- to the claimants alongwith penalty and interest, under Section 4-A of the Workmens Compensation Act. This Award has been challenged by the appellant in this appeal. 2. The only submission of the counsel for the appellant is that the Insurance Company cannot be made liable for interest and penalty. 3. This question has been decided by this Court in its judgments reported in United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Roop Kanwar and others, (1991 ACJ 74) , and Madan Gopal and others v. Anandi Lal and others, (1992 ACJ 543) . 4. In Madan Gopals case (supra) this Court held as under; "The composite reading of the provisions of the Workmens Compensation Act with Sections 95, 96 and 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act makes it clear that in all the motor accident cases. It is the statutory duty of the Insurance Company to satisfy the award as the judgment debtor and it will not make any difference whether the award is passed under the Workmens Compensation Act or under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and whether it relates to the interest or penalty or to the compensation alone. If the liability of the Insurance Company arises for the principal amount and if the same is not deposited or paid within one month from the date of the accident, as required under Section 4-A (3) of the Act then the insurer also incurs the liability to pay the penalty and interest and the liability envisaged is the whole liability including the interest and the penalty." 5. The argument raised by the counsel for the appellant is covered by the aforesaid decision of this Court. Under these circumstances, there is no force in this appeal and the same is dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******