JUDGMENT The Workmen's Compensation Commissioner awarded compensation and also directed penalty of 30% of the compensation amount to be payable by the owner of the vehicle. The para 36 of the judgment deals with the liability of the penalty imposed on the appellant-owner. The Commissioner observes that the appellant-owner is a lawyer and conscious of the liability under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 yet did not deposit the compensation as per the Workmen's Compensation Act, therefore, slapped penalty of 30% of the compensation amount. 2. Per contra the learned Counsel for the appellant argued that immediately after the accident, the appellant has paid Rs. 20.000/- to the claimant to meet the immediate needs and that there was no intention on the part of the appellant to avoid liability. 3. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration: Whether the finding of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner that the employer being a lawyer has defaulted to deposit the amount as per law, for that reason, whether imposition of penalty of 30% of the compensation is perversely contrary to law and evidence on record? 4. The reason stated by the Commissioner that the appellant is lawyer, he is aware of the liabilities and obligations under the Workmen's Compensation Act. Therefore, for the breach of obligation, imposing penalty of 30% of the compensation is unreasonable. The ignorance of law is no excuse in law. But, there is no categorical presumption in law, which attributes complete knowledge of law and legislations on the part of a lawyer. Nobody can claim perfect knowledge of law and all the legislations. The life of a lawyer is a constant journey of learning. A lawyer will have thorough skills of advocacy yet necessarily has to refer to law books frequently to refresh and update the knowledge of law and legislations. Therefore, imposing harsh penalty of 30% only on the ground that the employer-appellant is a lawyer is bad in law. The facts reveal that the appellant paid Rs. 20,000/- voluntarily to the injured immediately after the accident. The order of Workmen's Compensation Commissioner imposing penalty of 30% of the compensation amount is set aside. The rest of the award is confirmed. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.