JUDGMENT : Oriental Insurance Company Limited as appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, challenging the judgment and award dated 30.09.2004 passed by the learned W.C. Commissioner at Dhubri in W.C. Case No.55 of 1998. By that judgment and award, the leaned tribunal has directed the Insurance Company to make payment of Rs.1,97,060/- within a period of 30 days along with simple interest @ 9% per annum with effect from the date of institution of the claim petition. [2] One Musstt. Sayeda Banu filed a petition before the learned W.C. Commissioner at Dhubri stating that her husband Abdul Aziz was engaged as handiman in the vehicle No. AS-01/B-0785 owned by one Kanu Paul and met with an accident on 31.08.1997. As a result of the accident he received grievous injuries on his person and had to receive treatment at Dhubri Civil Hospital, Coch Bihar Nursing Home and North Bengal Medical College Hospital. Internal gangrene developed in his left bone and he succumbed to the injury on 13.07.1998. A police case was also registered in connection with the same accident. [3] On being summoned the owner/opposite party No.2 appeared and admitted his written statement about employment of the victim as handiman in his vehicle and disclosed that the handiman was paid Rs.2,100/- as his monthly wages. The Opposite party No.2 also disclosed that the vehicle was covered under valid insurance of the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Claimant examined 2 witnesses including herself and proved that her husband was engaged as handiman in the vehicle by the opposite party No.2 and that he had met with an accident on 31.08.1997 due to which he sustained grievous injuries and ultimately, died for formation of internal gangrene. She exhibited as many as 13 documents including the postmortem report as Exhibit-1 and thus, the fact that the victim died was duly proved. On considering all the materials available on records, the learned W.C. Commissioner decided the case under Section 4(1)A of the Workmen’s Compensation Act and assessed the compensation at Rs.1,97,060/-. It is this judgment which has been brought under challenge in this present appeal. [4] I have heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. C. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondents, although notices were duly served on them. It is this judgment which has been brought under challenge in this present appeal. [4] I have heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. C. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondents, although notices were duly served on them. [5] Upon perusal of the lower courts records, the learned Senior Counsel Mr. S. Dutta, submits that the whole of the awarded amount was deposited with the jurisdictional W.C. Commissioner and thereupon, the same has been disbursed to the claimant already and this may be the reason for which no one has put up appearance even after the notice of the appeal was served. [6] This appeal was admitted on the sole substantial question of law as follows:- “Whether the Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation, Dhubri can pass the award without deciding the causal connection with the accident and the employment of the deceased?” [7] The claimant has proved Exhibit-12, photograph of the victim which shows that there was amputation on the left leg of the victim. By adducing Exhibit-1 it is proved that he died on 16.07.1998, whereas the accident was taken place on 31.08.1997. Exhibit-7 is the discharge certificate from North Bengal Medical College Hospital showing that the victim was an indoor patient in Word No.MS4 and bed No.18 and he was hospitalized for the period from 06.09.1997 to 13.01.1998 for multiple injuries following road traffic accident. This certificate issued by the North Bengal Medical College Hospital is indicative of the fact that the victim was given treatment by that medical college owing to the injuries received due to the road traffic accident. Exhibti-5 is the injury report given by the Medical and Health Officer, Dhubri which also shows as many as 4 injuries. All of these are described as grievous injuries by the issuing doctor. This certificate was issued on 14.10.1997. The postmortem report shows that the left leg and foot of the deceased contained as many as 3 injuries, whereas injury No.1 is a multiple fracture on left leg along with extreme superficial ulceration on the lateral surface. All these are indicative of the fact that on the place of amputation there was infection leading to ulceration. So, it is clear that the misfortune of the victim had started from the accident and resulted in his ultimate death which appears to be substantially proved. All these are indicative of the fact that on the place of amputation there was infection leading to ulceration. So, it is clear that the misfortune of the victim had started from the accident and resulted in his ultimate death which appears to be substantially proved. This being the position the sole substantial question of law does not appear to arise in the present case. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. [8] No order as to costs. [9] Send down the records immediately.