JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel. 2. This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company against the award passed by Workmen Compensation Commissioner on 4/7/96 in case No. 16/90, (Radha Bai v. Shyam Lal and Anr.) . 3. Learned counsel for the appellant Mr. J.K.Chanda submits that death of Ramesh aged 35- husband of the claimant Radha Bai had taken place on account of excess drinking of liquor in the insured three wheeler (Taxi) and, therefore, same cannot be said to have taken place on account of accident, though he submitted that there was no evidence of any criminal offence having been committed upon the body of the said Ramesh and the postmortem report only indicates that liquor was found in his stomach. Learned counsel for the appellant presses the present appeal to the extent of imposition of penalty by the learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner of Rs. 10,000/- in the impugned award. He further submits that amount of compensation in question has already been deposited as per the requirement of provision relating to appeal under the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923. 4. No one appears for the respondent claimant despite service. 5. Having heard the learned counsel and in view of the legal position as settled by the Apex Court that Insurance Company under the insurance contract is not liable to make good the amount of penalty imposed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner for the compensation awarded in favour of the claimant. To this extent, the present appeal of the Insurance Company deserves to be allowed. 6. Consequently, this appeal is partly allowed to the extent of imposition of penalty and recovery of same from the appellant Insurance Company. Rest of the award is, however, maintained. The amount of penalty, if already deposited by the Insurance Company, may be refunded back to the Insurance Company. No order as to costs. 7. Copy of this order be sent to the opposite side.Appeal Partly Allowed. *******