JUDGMENT : Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J. This appeal is filed in terms of Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short Act of 1923) against the award dated 27th August, 2015, passed by Deputy Labour Commissioner Kashmir, the authority constituted under Act of 1923. In terms of the impugned award, the authority has directed the appellant to deposit an amount of Rs. 6,50,567/- within thirty days time from the date of passing of the award, failing which the appellant would be liable to pay 50% penalty as provided U/S 4-A of the Act of 1923. It is also directed that the appellant would be liable to pay further interest @ 10% from the compensation amount w.e.f. 1st April, 2013 to 31st July, 2015. 2. Feeling aggrieved of the aforesaid award this appeal has been filed. Mr. Makroo, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there is no relationship of employer and employee between the deceased and the appellant. Learned counsel further submitted that if on the basis of the material available on file it is accepted that the appellant being principal is liable to pay compensation but still in terms of Section 12 of the Act of 1923 the contractor who provided persons for employment was to be directed by the authority to indemnify the appellant. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-Contractor submitted that the contract of the deceased employee, in all respects, was with the appellant as such the contractor would not be liable to compensate the appellant. 4. From the pleadings of the parties and the evidence which has been brought on record and even as admitted by Mr. Makroo at bar that the deceased was an employee with the appellant, would the contractor be liable to indemnify the appellant in respect of the compensation amount awarded by the authority, would require to be seen. 5. In view of the material available on record and the evidence of the parties, it is established on record that one Amarjeet Singh though provided by respondent no. 4 was in actual and physical control of the appellant. 6. In this fact situation this appeal in terms of Section 30 of the Act of 1923 would not be maintainable to the extent of claimants as no substantial question of law is involved in this case. 7. 4 was in actual and physical control of the appellant. 6. In this fact situation this appeal in terms of Section 30 of the Act of 1923 would not be maintainable to the extent of claimants as no substantial question of law is involved in this case. 7. However, question of substantial law does arise in terms of Section 12 of the Act of 1923 and would require to be determined. Perusal of the impugned award would show that the authority has not adverted its attention to the aspect of the case. The matter to this extent would require to be remitted to the authority. 8. For the above stated reasons this appeal is disposed of in the following manner: The appellant to the extent of claimants respondents 1 to 3 is dismissed. Registry shall release the balance deposited amount in favour of the respondents along with the interest forthwith. The amount shall be paid by issuance of A/C payees cheque and on identification of claimants by their learned counsel. 9. The issue about applicability of Section 12 of the Act of 1923 would require to be determined by the authority for which instead the matter is remitted back to the authority. The authority in order to arrive at lawful conclusion would be at liberty to afford an opportunity to the parties to produce any legally admissible material/evidence in this behalf and thereafter pass appropriate orders. The authority to decide the matter, as directed, preferably within three months from the date copy of this order is served.