Judgment :- K. Govindarajan, J. The above appeal is preferred by the claimant questioning the quantum of compensation fixed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation - II, Madras in the order dated 11.1.1996 passed in W.C.No.23/1995. 2. In the accident occurred on 14.9.1994, the claimant sustained severe injuries when he was driving the car bearing Regn.No.TDO 2727 owned by the 1st respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent-insurance company. Hence the claimant filed the above case claiming compensation. 3. Learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation fixed the quantum of compensation at Rs.86,112/-, taking into account the disability at 80%. Since the other factors are not disputed, we are not dealing with the same. 4. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the claimant is the driver of the said vehicle and his right hand has been amputated and so the loss of earning capacity has to be taken as 100% and not 80%. The said submission cannot be accepted in view of Schedule I, Part II of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. Even according to the learned counsel, as per the Schedule of the said Act, the percentage of loss of earning capacity has to be fixed only at 80%. So the learned Commissioner is correct in fixing the loss of earning capacity at 80%. Since the quantum of compensation has been fixed according to the provisions of the said Act, we are not inclined to interfere with the same and no substantial question of law arises in this appeal. 5. In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed. No costs.