JUDGMENT VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J. - This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred under Sec. 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (in short 'The Act') against the impugned order dtd. 29/10/2008 in W.C. No.7 of 2007 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tirupathi (hereinafter be referred to as "Commissioner"). 2. The appellant herein was the Opposite Party No.2 and the respondents herein were the applicants and Opposite Party No.1 before the learned Commissioner. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter will be referred to as arrayed before the learned Commissioner. 3. Case of the applicants in brief is that the deceased V.Venkata Ramana is the son of the first applicant and applicants 2 & 3 are the brothers of the deceased. He worked as lorry cleaner under the O.P.No.1 and on his instruction, on 26/10/2006 at 9.00 PM, he along with lorry driver Chandra Mouli, left from Rajampet with load of Banana to Tadipatri and when they reached near Palempalli petrol bunk bypass road, the driver of the lorry drove the vehicle in a high speed and dashed to the rear side of a stationed tipper. Both driver and cleaner died in the said accident. 4. Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 admitted that the applicant was working under O.P.No.1 as cleaner and the O.P.No.2 i.e. Insurer alone is liable to pay compensation to the applicant. O.P.No.2 denied the employee employer relationship in between the deceased and Opposite Party No.1 and the compensation claimed by the applicants are excessive and hence requested for dismissal of the case. 5. Issues - Enquiry - Finding: a. Basing on the rival pleadings of both sides, the learned Commissioner framed the following issues for adjudication; i. Whether the deceased was a workman as per the provisions of workmen's compensation Act 1923 and he met with an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment resulting into death? ii. What is the age of deceased at the time of accident ? iii. What were the wages paid to the deceased at the time of accidental death ? iv. What is the quantum of compensation payable to the applicants? v. Who are liable to pay the compensation to the applicants? b. During the course of enquiry, the 1st applicant/ mother of the deceased V.Munemma was examined as AW.1. Exs.A1 to A6 were the documents marked. iv. What is the quantum of compensation payable to the applicants? v. Who are liable to pay the compensation to the applicants? b. During the course of enquiry, the 1st applicant/ mother of the deceased V.Munemma was examined as AW.1. Exs.A1 to A6 were the documents marked. On behalf of O.P.No.2, no evidence is adduced. c. After hearing both the counsel and on appreciation of the evidence on record, the learned Commissioner concluded that both the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally liable to deposit an amount of Rs.3, 37, 202.00 as compensation besides stamp duty of Rs.674.00 along with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of accident till the date of payment of compensation or realisation by means of demand draft drawn in favour of the Commissioner within 30 days of receipt of the order, failing which, they have to pay penalty u/s.4(A)3 of the W.C. Act. 6. Grounds of Apeal: Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order impugned, the Opposite Party No.2 preferred the present appeal on the following grounds; i. The award of the Commissioner is illegal, contrary to law and facts, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case. ii. The Commissioner erred in awarding interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of the accident will the actual payment or realization. iii. The award of the Commissioner is unsustainable to the extent of awarding interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of the accident, which is contrary to the settled principles of law. Substantial question of Law: 7. Heard. The only point raised in the appeal against the impugned order is Whether the Commissioner can grant interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of accident or not? POINT 8. The law on this point is no more res-integra. In Saberabibi Yakubhai Shaikh v. National Insurance Co. Ltd, (2014) 2 SCC 298 . where the matter was carried in Appeal to the Hon'ble Apex Court placing reliance on Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Siby George and others, (2012) 12 SCC 540 . since direction was given to pay interest from the date of adjudication of claim application relying on Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation/Uttarakhand Transport Corporation v. Satnam Singh, (2011) 14 SCC 758 . the Hon'ble Supreme Court at para 9 and 10 held thus; "9. since direction was given to pay interest from the date of adjudication of claim application relying on Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation/Uttarakhand Transport Corporation v. Satnam Singh, (2011) 14 SCC 758 . the Hon'ble Supreme Court at para 9 and 10 held thus; "9. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the aforesaid judgment of the High Court is contrary to the law laid down by this Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Limited versus Siby George and others [ (2012) 12 SCC 540 ]. 10. We have perused the aforesaid judgment. We are of the considered opinion that the aforesaid judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants is fully applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. This Court considered the earlier judgment relied upon by the High Court and observed that the judgments in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mubasir Ahmed [ (2007) 2 SCC 349 ] and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mohd. Nasir [ (2009) 6 SCC 280 ] were per incuriam having been rendered without considering the earlier decision in Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas Sabata [ (1976) 1 SCC 289 ]. In the aforesaid judgment, upon consideration of the entire matter, a four-judge Bench of this Court had held that the compensation has to be paid from the date of the accident." 9. In Ajaya Kumar Das and another vs. Divisional Manager and Another, [2022] 1 S.C.R. 468. where the Commissioner awarded compensation alongwith interest of 12% per annum from the date of accident, the Hon'ble Apex Court had one more occasion to reiterate the law at para 5 as follows; "The error on the part of the High Court has led a labourer and his spouse to travel all the way to this Court. Though the accident took place in 2000, the course of litigation would now end only with the present judgment. To set the record straight, the High Court has erred on merits as well. Sec. 4A of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1923 stipulates that the Commissioner shall direct the employer to pay interest of 12% or at a higher rate, not exceeding the lending rates of any scheduled banks specified, if the employer does not pay the compensation within one month from the date it fell due. In Saberabibi Yakubhai Shaikh v. National Insurance Co. In Saberabibi Yakubhai Shaikh v. National Insurance Co. Ltd., (2014) 2 SCC 298 . this Court held that interest shall be paid on the compensation awarded from the date of the accident and not the date of adjudication of the claim in view of the decision of this Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Siby George, (2012) 12 SCC 540 . where it was held that, compensation would fall due from the date of the accident. Further, in the recent decision in P. Meenaraj v. P.Adigurusamy and Anr., Civil Appeal No 209 of 2022, decided on 6/1/2022 - Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.. this Court reiterated that the applicant is entitled to interest from the date of accident while rejecting the submission that the award of interest should be after the expiry of 30 days from the date of accident. Thus, there was no legal basis for the High Court to delete the order of payment of interest." 10. In this light, the applicants are entitled to have interest over the compensation amount from the date of accident till the date of realization at the rate of 12% per annum and the order of the Learned Commissioner is on correct lines, and the appeal is devoid of merits. 11. In result, the Appeal stands dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their own costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.