JUDGMENT : Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, J. 1. Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A.R. Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent workmen. 2. A claim was made by the injured workman before the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Dhubri for compensation for the injuries that he had sustained in an accident that took place on 20.07.2003 while he was employed as a handy man of the Vehicle No. ASG-5158, while the said vehicle was travelling from Golakganj to Agomani. 3. In his evidence, the claimant workman stated that he earned Rs. 1000/- per month plus the daily allowance of Rs. 80/-. By calculating the daily allowance of Rs. 80/- the claimant makes a claim that his total monthly salary was Rs. 1000/- (+) Rs. 80/- (x) 30/- = 2400/- and accordingly, the claimant earns a total amount of Rs. 3400/-. 4. Based on the aforesaid evidence by taking the income of the injured workman to be Rs. 3400/- per month, the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation by the judgment and order dated 09.10.2009 had awarded an amount of Rs. 2,28,480/- along with interest of 6% per annum from the date of the accident up to the date of depositing the money in the Court. 5. The Insurance Company has preferred this appeal on the sole ground that as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the component of daily allowance cannot be added for the purpose of evaluating the salary of a workman and therefore, the salary of the workman being Rs. 1,000/- per month, the total daily allowance being Rs. 2400/- for a month cannot be added to the Rs. 1000/- and make the salary to be Rs. 3400/-. As because of the ground taken by the appellant Insurance Company, we are not recording the other factual aspect as regards the accident and nature of injury suffered by the workman. 6. If we take away the daily allowance component from the salary claimed by the workman, the balance that would remain would be Rs. 1,000/- per month to be construed as the salary. 7.
6. If we take away the daily allowance component from the salary claimed by the workman, the balance that would remain would be Rs. 1,000/- per month to be construed as the salary. 7. Without going into the merit of the ground taken by the Insurance Company, which again can be looked from two different perspective, we take note of that in course of the hearing, settlement is arrived at between the appellant Insurance Company and the Workman and it was agreed upon that the Insurance Company will pay an amount of Rs. 1,45,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Five Thousand) to the workman as the full and final settlement which would also include the interest awarded by the Commissioner, Workman in its judgment dated 09.10.2009. Accordingly, we accept that the amount of compensation to be paid by the Insurance Company to the claimant workman would be Rs. 1,45,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Five Thousand). 8. We have been told that the required amount had been deposited by the Insurance Company with the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Dhubri on 27.04.2011. 9. We also have been told that an amount of Rs. 1,13,869/- had been deposited by the Insurance Company which had been already withdrawn by the claimant on 27.04.2011. In other words, when the settlement had been arrived at for an amount of Rs. 1,45,000/- the amount now payable to the claimant would be Rs. 1,45,000/- (-) Rs. 1,13,869/- which will be equal to Rs. 31,131/-. Accordingly, it is directed that the claimant workman shall be entitled to withdraw the amount of Rs. 31,131/-. As the amount deposited with the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation, Dhubri on 27.04.2011, it is understood that the said amount was kept in the Office of the Commissioner in a fixed deposit account which had accrued some interest. Whatever interest was accrued for the amount of Rs. 31,131/- shall be paid by the Office of the Commissioner, Workman to the injured Workman over and above the amount of Rs. 31,131/- the balance of the amount which had already been deposited shall be refunded to the Insurance Company also along with the interest that had accrued in the meantime. 10. In terms of the above, the appeal stands disposed of.