JUDGMENT 1. - These 10 misc. appeals have been filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") against a joint order dated 9-3-1994 passed by Workmen's Compensation, Nagaur. 2. There being common questions of fact and law involved and the common arguments have been advanced, therefore, these misc. appeals are being decided by this common judgment, copy of which be placed in each file. 3. By the impugned order the learned Commissioner has accepted the applications filed by the workmen or their dependents filed under Section 3 of the Act and has awarded different amount of compensation as per Section 4 read with Schedule IV of the said Act. The amount awarded to each of the applications is as under: Name of Applicant Application No./date of filing claim Compensation awarded (Rs.) Date of death Penalty @ 50% Period of interest (months) Interest @ 6% Total amount (Rs.) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kesudi 5/9223-8-92 4286/- 28-3-92 2143/- 21 4501/- 6879/- Dhayali 32/9216-6-92 6065/- 16-6-92 3033/- 21 6369/- 9735/- Bajudi 72/928-6-92 6065/- 17-11-92 3033/- 21 6369/- 9735/- Rehmat 99/9210-6-92 63808/- 8-9-91 3190/- 21 6700/- 1024/- Sugani 125/928-6-92 3738/- 19-11-90 1869/- 21 3925/- 5999/- Panki 164/925-8-92 4678/- 14-8-92 2339/- 17 3977/- 7415/- Nanudi 165/9210-8-92 4656/- 31-3-90 2328/- 17 3958/- 7380/- Mamaki 175/9325-12-92 3226/- 28-2-89 1613/- 14 2259/- 5065/- Teja 177/9325-12-92 3627/- 21-12-91 1813/- 14 2539/- 5695/- Ladkanwar 178/9325-12-92 5233/- 23-12-90 2616/- 14 3663/- 8216/- 4. All the claimants came with a plea that they were employed in the Tungsten Mines at Degana run by non-applicant, appellant herein, for a period ranging from six to ten years and have contacted occupational disease sillicosis. Mangla and Raju workmen filed the applications themselves during their life time and passed away pending litigation whereas remaining eight applications have been filed by widows or LRs. after death of workmen. All the applications have been filed in form "F" as prescribed under Rule 20 of the Workmen's Compensation Rules, 1924 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"). In all the applications period during which the workmen remained employed with the appellant corporation and the salary drawn by it along with age of the workmen were mentioned. The lump sum payment required was also mentioned. All the applications were accompanied with X-Ray report, medical certificate, blood examination report and sputum examination report among others. 5. In all the applications period during which the workmen remained employed with the appellant corporation and the salary drawn by it along with age of the workmen were mentioned. The lump sum payment required was also mentioned. All the applications were accompanied with X-Ray report, medical certificate, blood examination report and sputum examination report among others. 5. In All the applications the non-applicants appellant herein submitted their reply admitting that the concerned workman was employed with them for a particular period and was drawing particular wages but it was denied that the workman ever contacted any disease arising out of and in the course of his employment in the corporation. It is further submitted that the concerned workman has resigned his job much prior to his death or contacting the disease of sillicosis. The period and the wages shown in the applications were denied and a different period of service and different amount of wages were mentioned in the written statement submitted on behalf of the corporation. It is also mentioned that some of the workers or their LRs. have filed their applications previously which were not pursued and were dismissed in default and have attained finality.6. On the basis of above pleadings of the parties the learned Commissioner framed following issues : (1) Whether the applicant was suffering from occupational disease Pneumoconiosis ? (2) What was the age of workman at the time he contacted the disease or passed away ? (3) What was the average wage the workman was drawing ? (4) What is the degree of loss of working capacity, if any, calculated by Pneumoconiosis Medical Board ? (5) Whether the application was barred by limitation ? 7. To prove the above issues applicants have examined themselves and have also examined Dr. Chain Roop Sethia, Medical officer, Government Hospital, Degana. On the contrary on, behalf of corporation Lakhu Singh, Project Manager, Degana; Dr. S.R. Soni, Incharge of Nursing Home, Jaipur; Dr. Ashok Kumar Lehri, General Manager, RSMDC; Karni Dan Singh Rajawat, Jr. Manager (Admn.); Arvind Kumar Kaushik, Sr. Group Officer (Accounts), RSMDC were examined.8. During the pendency of the application before the Commissioner 15 revision petitions were filed with a prayer that the certificate issued by Dr. Sethia on the basis of X-Ray plates cannot be given credence. To prove the disease of Pneumoconiosis examination by a medical board duly appointed under the Rules be made. Group Officer (Accounts), RSMDC were examined.8. During the pendency of the application before the Commissioner 15 revision petitions were filed with a prayer that the certificate issued by Dr. Sethia on the basis of X-Ray plates cannot be given credence. To prove the disease of Pneumoconiosis examination by a medical board duly appointed under the Rules be made. All these 15 revision petitions were accepted on 1-11-1993 and a direction was given to constitute a medical board under Section 4 of the Act to examine the X-Ray reports and medical certificates filed on behalf of the applicants. Consequently, the board of three doctors was constituted who examined the cases of all the 15 applicants and after considering the X-Ray plates and other record available gave a finding with regard to 10 workmen referred above that they were suffering from Pneumoconiosis and the remaining five Sarva Shri Bhopal, Mansukh, Binjaram, Banshirarn and Candu were not suffering from Pneumoconlosts disease but were suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. To prove the report of the medical board Dr. Vimal Kumar Shrama, Professor and Head of the Department of T.B. and Chest Hospital, Jaipur and Chairman of the Medical Board was examined.9. The learned Commissioner, after threadbare discussion of the evidence ocular and documentary, has decreed the claim of the 10 applicants only whose disease was diagnosed by the board as Pneumoconiosis and the applications of the five persons whose disease was diagnosed as pulmonary tuberculosis were dismissed.10. By these misc. appeals appellant corporation has made sundry submissions among others submitting that some of the applications were barred by time, the claimant has not shown sufficient cause for condoing the delay yet the learned Commissioner has condoned the same ignoring the provisions of law. Reliance has wrongly been placed on the testimony of Dr. C.R. Sethia who issued the certificate of occupational disease on the basis of X-Ray reports only and not on clinical or pathological test. The Chairman of the Medical Board Dr. Vimal Kumar Sharma has stated that the certificates issued by Dr. Sethia were not sufficient to state the loss of disability. The age of workmen on the date of contacting disease or death as also their monthly wages have correctly been mentioned in "B" register maintained by the appellant which should have been the basis of assessing the damages. Vimal Kumar Sharma has stated that the certificates issued by Dr. Sethia were not sufficient to state the loss of disability. The age of workmen on the date of contacting disease or death as also their monthly wages have correctly been mentioned in "B" register maintained by the appellant which should have been the basis of assessing the damages. It is submitted that no complaint was ever made while the workmen were on duty about any disease. There was wet drilling and there was no dry drilling and the question of resulting into this kind of disease on account of working on the mines does not arise. The penalty amount as also interest amount awarded have also been challenged.11. On the contrary learned counsel for the workmen has supported the impugned order.12. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and have carefully scrutinised the evidence ocular and documentary vis-a-vis the order under appeal.13. These appeals have been filed under Section 30 of the Act. The first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 30 reads as under : "Provided that no appeal shall lie against any order unless a substantial question of law is involved in the appeal." 14. The substantial question of law has subsequently been discussed by numerous High Courts and the Apex Court and must be given a wider construction than Section 110 of CPC. It should cover even cases in which the Commissioner has clearly misdirected himself on a question of law such as awarding compensation without giving notice to employer. A substantial question of law is involved if the finding of a Commissioner is not based on evidence. Similarly, if a finding recorded without any evidence whatsoever or where a finding of fact is based on no material or is arrived at by ignoring a material piece of evidence or misreading an evidence or findings are not supported by any evidence on record or reasons or logic and based merely on conjectures and surmises. What weight should be given and what value should be given to a particular evidence is a matter for court of fact and if a court of fact puts greater weight on a certain piece of evidence such a conclusion cannot be said to raise a substantial question of law upon which an appeal can be entertained.15. What weight should be given and what value should be given to a particular evidence is a matter for court of fact and if a court of fact puts greater weight on a certain piece of evidence such a conclusion cannot be said to raise a substantial question of law upon which an appeal can be entertained.15. In the matter at hand the learned Commissioner has fairly dealt with ocular and documentary evidence produced by both the parties. It was an admitted fact that the workman of all the 10 applications were under the employment of the appellant for a period ranging from six to ten years. It is further admitted that in the Tungsten Mines of Degana being run by the appellant the workman of these ten petitions were under the employment. Even assuming that some of the workmen may have stopped coming to the mines due to the disease or their weakness, that by itself was not sufficient to hold that the disease of Pneumoconiosis was contacted by them after they left the job. Ordinarily no man will leave a job after six to ten years unless and until he gets the better opportunity somewhere else. When the learned Commissioner came to the conclusion that within a period of about two years after leaving the job the workmen have passed away due to a disease of Pneumoconiosis, it can be safely inferred that all the ten workmen have contacted the above disease during the period they were in service with the appellant.16. It was at the request of the appellant corporation and by the order of this Court passed in revision petitions a medical board was constituted who also examined X-Ray reports and other material available with regard to all the 15 workmen and has come to the conclusion that the workmen whose applications have been accepted were suffering from Pneumoconiosis and the remaining five are suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. Dr. Vimal Kumar Sharma, Professor and Head of the Department of T.B. and Chest Hospital, Jaipur and Chairman of the Medical Board has come into evidence and has proved that ten workmen whose applications have been accepted were suffering from the disease of Pneumoconiosis whereas remaining five were suffering from pulmonary tuberculosts. This witness has been cross-examined at length, however, nothing substantial affecting his testimony of the cases of these ten workmen could be brought on record. Dr. This witness has been cross-examined at length, however, nothing substantial affecting his testimony of the cases of these ten workmen could be brought on record. Dr. Vimal Kumar Sharma in cross-examination has specifically stated that Pneumoconlosis is an occupational disease. It has been further stated that sillicosis is a permanent disease whereas tuberculosis is curable. Not an iota of suggestion is given to Dr. Vimal Kumar Sharma that Pneumoconiosis disease could have been contacted by these ten workmen during a period when they stopped coming to Degana Mines.17. When the medical board has come to the conclusion that ten workmen whose applications have been decreed by the learned Commissioner were suffering from Pneumoconiosis disease and when it has been admitted case of the appellant that these workmen remained employed with them for a period of six to ten years prior to their death, it can be safely inferred that the above disease was contacted during the period they were working in the Degana Tungsten Mines of the appellant.18. The learned Commissioner has assessed the damages on the basis of the age and monthly wages of each of the worker as shown by the appellant in their "B" register, Therefore, the compensation so assessed cannot be said to be excessive or not based on proper assessment of the evidence or schedule IV of the Rules referred above.19. Even if some of the persons may have filed an application and the same may have been dismissed in default, the subsequent application is not barred by limitation or by res judicata. Under Section 10 of the Act the Commissioner has been conferred with powers to condone the delay. The last proviso of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Act reads as under : "Provided further that the Commissioners may entertain and decide any claim to compensation in any case notwithstanding that the notice has not been given or the claim has not been preferred in due time as provided in this sub-section, if he satisfied that the failure so to give the notice or prefer the claim, as the case may be, was due to sufficient cause." 20. In the matter at hand the Commissioner has rightly condoned the delay in preferring the claim. In the matter at hand the Commissioner has rightly condoned the delay in preferring the claim. When some of the workmen have passed away and the claimants were illiterate rustic villagers having no legal knowledge about filing of the lis, it is just possible that they may have delayed filing of the claim petition. To meet that eventuality the above provision has been prescribed by the Parliament. In the matter at hand learned Commissioner has not committed any illegality or irregularity in awarding or assessing the damages as also interest and penalty amount.21. During the course of arguments also the learned counsel for the appellant could not indicate what substantial question of law was involved. He could not point out that the award was based on a misreading of evidence or ignoring the material piece of evidence or that the findings recorded by the Commissioner were not based on any evidence whatsoever. The lumpsum payments awarded were based on the principle mentioned in Section 5 of the Act as also Schedule IV of the Rules. Calculation of the amount was more or less a mathematical exercise. No interference in the facts finding of the learned Commissioner can be entertained unless and until it causes miscarriage of justice or it is based on conjectures and surmises or misreading of evidence or no evidence at all. In the matter at hand no such situation has arisen.22. Consequently there is no merit in these misc. appeals. They are dismissed and the impugned orders are upheld. If the amount is not disbursed the same shall be disbursed forthwith.Appeals dismissed. *******