JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J: Under the impugned award, the learned Commissioner, (under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, Chamba District Chamba, H.P.), assessed, vis-à-vis the dependants’ of the deceased workman, principal compensation amount borne in a sum of Rs. 3,14,910. The aforesaid quantum of principal compensation amount, assessed, vis-à-vis the dependants of the deceased workman, was, within a period of one month, from the date of its receiving a copy of its verdict, hence directed to be deposited by the Insurer concerned. Moreover, it was further ordered that on failure of its meteing compliance therewith, it being amenable, for, bearing liability vis-à-vis the interest accruing thereon. 2. Uncontrovertedly, the learned counsel for the Insurance company, did, before the learned Commissioner, hence tender into evidence Ext. R- 1. However, therein, there is no display, of any occurrence therein, of, a specific exculpatory or exclusionary clause, (i) whereupon the fastening(s), vis-à-vis the insurer of liability(s) of interest, accruing on the principal compensation amount, can tenably be invalidated. Contrarily, it is a simple insurance cover. 3. During the pendency of the instant appeal before this Court, the learned counsel, for the appellant has filed an application, bearing No. CMP No. 6385 of 2017, application whereof, is constituted under the provisions of Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, wherein leave of this Court, is sought, to adduce into evidence, a comprehensive insurance cover, executed interse it with the employer, of, the deceased workman. Even though, the aforesaid hereat endeavour, of the learned counsel for the insurance company, is belated, AND despite his holding an earlier opportunity to, before the learned Commissioner, hence adduce the aforesaid piece of evidence, yet, his apposite omissions, may frustrate his endeavour(s) made before this Court, (i) nonetheless, despite the aforesaid failings and shortcomings, the leave as sought, through, the instant application, warrants it being accorded, imperatively a) when a perusal of the comprehensive insurance cover, makes, a disclosure of its containing a specific validly contracted exclusionary clause, rendering hence the insurance cover, to be amenable, for a construction qua impermissibility, of, any fastening upon the insurer, of, liability(s) of interest, accruing on the principal compensation amount; (b) thereupon if leave, as asked, is refused, thereupon hence injustice would befall vis-à-vis the insurance company, comprised in its being held liable to indemnify, the dependants’ of the deceased workman, the burden of, interest accruing, on the principal compensation amount; (c) besides obviously hence it is just and essential for enabling this Court to render a clinching verdict with respect to the aforesaid facet. Leave granted. 4. Be that as it may, since the aforesaid piece of evidence, is enjoined to be tendered and exhibited, only, before the learned Commissioner also when its evidentiary worth vis-à-vis the imperative legal facet, is to be also gauged only by the learned Commissioner, (i) thereupon, after partly qua the relevant facet, hence quashing the impugned award, the matter is remanded to the learned Commissioner, who, upon his receiving it, shall permit its tendering(s) besides exhibition(s), (ii) AND shall thereafter render in consonance therewith, a pronouncement, with respect to the entity(s) or the person(s) concerned, whereupon whom, the liability of interest, accruing on the principal compensation amount, can be aptly fastened. (iii) The learned Commissioner is directed to, also within a period of two months, record a verdict qua the legality of his directing, the insurer to indemnify the dependents’, of, the deceased workman, the pecuniary component therein vis-à-vis statutory penalty. (iv) After a pronouncement is recorded, by the learned Commissioner, he shall transmit the relevant records before this Court. All pending application(s), if any, are disposed of.