Sureshwar Thakur, J. The claimant/workman, standing aggrieved by the impugned award recorded by the learned Commissioner under the Employee’s Compensation Act, Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mandi, on his apposite petition for compensation for cent percentum disabling injuries sustained by him during the course of his performing employment under his employer, thereupon stands constrained to assail it by preferring an appeal therefrom herebefore. 2. This Court, while hearing the learned counsel for the parties had framed, for adjudication, the following extracted substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the learned Commissioner below has fallen into error by considering the monthly wages of the appellant as Rs.4000/- per month in place of Rs.8000/- per month? 2. Whether the learned Commissioner below is not justified to consider 60% of the wages of Rs.4000/- in place of 60% wages of Rs.8000/- as per amended Act? 3. Whether the learned Commissioner below is not justified to decide the petition of the appellant on the basis of old Act as the Act has been amended on 31.5.2010. 4. Whether the monthly wages of the employee have been considered as Rs.4000/- per month in place of Rs.8000/-? 3. Uncontrovertedly, the claimant/workman during the course of his performing employment as a Mechanic under the respondent-employer sustained injuries upon his person in sequel thereto a 100% disability as stands embodied in the apposite disability certificate comprised in Ext.PA stood entailed upon him. The mishap sequelling injuries whereupon a cent percent loss of earning capacity stood entailed upon the disabled workman occurred on 28.12.2012, whereat under an apposite amendment carried by the Central Government to the hitherto apposite provision begot an apposite substitution qua the hitherto mandate held therein qua where a workman evidently receives wages exceeding Rs.4000/- his wages for computing vis-à-vis him compensation amount standing pegged in a sum of Rs. 4000/-, whereto the apt statutory principles on their evident applicability thereat stood enjoined to be applied thereon by the learned Commissioner for computing the compensation assessable qua the claimant/workman concerned, contrarily where within be speakings stand encapsulated qua the wages drawn by the disabled workman concerned from his performing his relevant employment under his employer standing statutorily pegged in a sum of Rs.8000/- hence thereat held applicability besides force, whereon he hence stood enjoined to apply the relevant statutory principles for reckoning the compensation amount assessable qua the disabled workman concerned. However, the learned Commissioner remained unmindful of the apposite substitution meted by an amendment brought to the relevant provision also he un-noticed the apposite amendment carried in the apposite provisions of the Act, whereas the apposite amendment qua the aforesaid facet was in operation thereat, also was in vogue at the relevant time of occurrence of the mishap, rather evidently he proceeded to mete deference to the un-substituted apposite provision encapsulated in the Act, whereupon he has inaptly construed qua the disabled workman concerned holding a statutory wage of Rs.4000/- per month whereon he proceeded to apply the statutory principles. In aftermath hence the learned Commissioner has mis-applied the provisions of law, which per se were inapplicable at the stage contemporaneous to the occurrence of the mishap, in sequel whereof, he has concomitantly mis-computed both the statutory wages drawn by the disabled workman concerned, also has mis-computed the compensation amount payable to the disabled workman concerned. 4. Be that as it may, with an apposite amendment standing carried by the Central Government to the relevant provision(s) of the Act where within a communication is held qua the statutory wages, of the disabled workman concerned whereon when in sequel to the injuries sustained by him during the course of his performing employment under his employer, a cent percentum loss of earning capacity stands entailed upon him hence standing statutorily pegged in a sum of Rs.8000/- also when the relevant amendment qua the relevant apposite facet held binding effect at the stage contemporaneous to the occurrence of the mishap, thereupon, in consonance with the mandate of apposite clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act after meeting 60% deduction thereto, a sum of Rs.4800/- constitutes the statutory wages whereupon the relevant statutory factor is enjoined to be applied. Corollary whereof is that the apposite factor enjoined to be applied to a sum of Rs.4800/- is 131.95. Consequently, a sum of Rs.6,33,360/- stands computed as the compensation amount payable to the disabled workman concerned. 5. For the reasons recorded herein-above, the instant appeal is allowed and the award impugned before this Court is modified to the aforesaid extent. Consequently, interest @ 12% per annum shall stand levied on the compensation amount of Rs.6,33,360/- also the aforesaid levied rate of interest thereon shall commence on one month elapsing since the accident i.e. 28.1.2013. All pending applications also stand disposed of. Consequently, interest @ 12% per annum shall stand levied on the compensation amount of Rs.6,33,360/- also the aforesaid levied rate of interest thereon shall commence on one month elapsing since the accident i.e. 28.1.2013. All pending applications also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.