JUDGMENT 1. - This misc. appeal has been filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. The appellant - United India Insurance Company is challenging the judgment dated 30.11.1998 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Udaipur in Claim Case No. 42/1995, whereby, the learned Commissioner allowed the compensation of Rs. 78,824/- in favour of respondents-claimants along with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of accident i.e. 07th May, 1995 to the date of depositing the amount by the insurance company before the Commissioner on 25th May, 1996, so also, imposed penalty of Rs. 5000/- against the insurance company. 2. After hearing both the parties and perusing the entire record of the case, so also, the impugned judgment, I am of the opinion that no substantial question of law emerges for consideration with regard to claim awarded by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Udaipur because during pendency of claim proceedings, insurance company deposited the amount of Rs. 78,824/- and in this appeal, the insurance company is raising voice that insurance company is not liable for interest and penalty because as soon as they received notice from the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Udaipur they deposited the entire amount. Further, it is submitted that employer did not inform the insurance company with regard to accident, therefore, employer is liable to pay the interest, so also, penalty cannot be imposed upon the insurance company. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of insurance company submits that if at all the finding of learned trial court with regard to imposing interest and penalty is upheld by this Court, then also, the amount of penalty and interest is required to be recovered from the employer not from the insurance company. 4. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellant has invited attention of this Court towards the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2009 (1) SCC 487 , Kamla Chaturvedi v. National Insurance Co. & Ors. and prayed that in view of the said judgement, no penalty and interest can be awarded against the insurance company. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents-claimants submits that no illegality has been committed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Udaipur while awarding the claim, interest and penalty in favour of claimants because undisputedly the vehicle in question was insured with the appellant - insurance company. 6. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents-claimants submits that no illegality has been committed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Udaipur while awarding the claim, interest and penalty in favour of claimants because undisputedly the vehicle in question was insured with the appellant - insurance company. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by both the parties. In my opinion, the learned Commissioner has considered all aspect of the matter and passed the claim for the reason that the accident occurred on 07th May, 1995 when deceased driver was driving vehicle No. RJ12/G-0175 and said vehicle was insured with the insurance company. 7. In this view of the matter, no error has been committed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Udaipur while awarding interest and penalty in favour of claimants. Further, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Kamla Chaturvedi (supra), so also, the judgment reported in MACD 2010 (1) (Raj.) 196, United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smt. Kanwari Devi & Ors. , the insurance company is not liable to pay penalty because soon after the accident, it is the duty of the employer to inform the insurance company with regard to accident, therefore, if no compensation is paid in time, then obviously the employer is liable to pay the penalty and penalty cannot be fasten upon the insurance company. 8. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, while considering the aforesaid judgment, the award is modified to the extent of imposing penalty and it is held that penalty is required to be recovered from the employer not from the insurance company. With regard to payment of interest, it is obvious that claim amount was lying with the insurance company till it was deposited in the office of Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Udaipur, therefore, insurance company has rightly been held responsible for interest at the rate of 6%. 9. In this view of the matter, this appeal is partly allowed and if the amount of penalty is still lying in the office of Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Udaipur, then same be refunded to the insurance company and if it has already been released in favour of claimants, then insurance company shall at liberty to recover the penalty amount from the employer.Appeal partly allowed. *******