JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, Judge (Oral) 1. The appellants herein are dependents of deceased Deepak, whose demise occurred during the course of his employment under respondent No.1. The factum of his demise occurring in an ill-fated accident involving the vehicle wherein he stood engaged by respondent No.1 as a cleaner remains uncontested. 2. The only submission made at the bar by the counsel for the appellant is qua the learned Commissioner under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, hereinafter referred to as the Commissioner, in his impugned award erroneously determining the deceased rearing from his engagement by respondent No.1 as a cleaner in the ill fated truck, an income of Rs.2,000/- per mensem. The determination of the aforesaid amount by the Commissioner in his impugned award hence constituting the income drawn by the deceased from his employment under respondent No.1 suffers from a gross infirmity arising from a gross non appreciation by it of the apt and germane evidence comprised in the cross-examination of RW-1 the employer of the deceased workman who voices therein the factum of his defraying to the deceased, wages in consonance with the wages prescribed by the Government. With the Commissioner while rendering the impugned award benumbing the efficacy of the aforesaid factum voiced by RW-1 in his cross-examination especially when rather it overwhelmed also subsumed the effect if any of any communication comprised in his examination in chief of his defraying to the deceased wages quantified at Rs.2000/- per mensem, has hence committed a gross fallibility of undermining its import. In other words, the effect of the aforesaid inference is of the learned Commissioner while quantifying a sum of Rs.2000/- as wages drawn by the deceased from his employer while standing engaged by him as a cleaner in the ill-fated truck suffers from its grossly overwhelming the effect, import besides the preponderant evidentiary force of the occurrence in the cross-examination of RW-1 of his defraying to the deceased workman wages in consonance with the one prescribed by the Government. In sequel, the award of the learned Commissioner determining the aforesaid amount to be the wages derived by the deceased from his employment by respondent No.1 as a cleaner in the ill-fated truck, is set-aside. In sequel, the award of the learned Commissioner determining the aforesaid amount to be the wages derived by the deceased from his employment by respondent No.1 as a cleaner in the ill-fated truck, is set-aside. The insurer has under an apposite insurance cover note, as submitted by the counsel for the claimants as well as by Shri Rupinder Singh, counsel for respondent No.1 accepted liability for any amount determined a compensation under the provisions of this Act, in sequel a direction is rendered upon the insurer to defray to the claimants compensation in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act on its taking into account the minimum wages as stood prescribed at the stage apposite to the institution of the claim petition before the Commissioner by the Government for theirs being defrayed to the deceased workman. Also in case the insurer has omitted to deposit the amount of compensation liability whereof stood fastened upon it by the learned Commissioner under its impugned award, it shall after adding interest thereon in consonance with the apt provisions of the Act shall defray compensation amount as directed to be hereinabove arrived by it equally to the claimants within a period of 30 days. However, if the amount as assessed as compensation by the Commissioner stands deposited by the insurer within 30 days then it shall not carry interest. Each of the claimants shall equally share the amount of compensation as ordered to be in the manner aforesaid paid by the insurer of the ill-fated vehicle. 3. In view of the above discussion, the instant appeal stands allowed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.