FAO-5108-2019 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ALIMAN AND OTHERS …Appellants Vs. DILBAG SINGH AND ANOTHER …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Digvijay, Advocate for Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for the applicants/appellants. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) 1. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the order dated 29.01.2019 passed by the learn Compensation Act, 1923, Gurugram, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs. 12,07,242/-, along with interest @ 12% per annum the extent of 50% of the compensation amount, was awarded on account of death of Mubarik. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Commissioner erred in assessing the monthly wages of the deceased @ Rs. 8,000/- instead of Rs. 15,000/ compensation awarded is inadequ granting future prospects; that interest ought to have been awarded @ 18% per annum as well as on the penalty amount; and impugned order deserves to be modified. No other point has been rai 3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record. 2019 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO Date of Decision: 02.07.2026 OTHERS …Appellants DILBAG SINGH AND ANOTHER …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Digvijay, Advocate for Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for the applicants/appellants. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the order dated 29.01.2019 passed by the learned Commissioner under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923, Gurugram, whereby compensation to the tune of , along with interest @ 12% per annum the extent of 50% of the compensation amount, was awarded on account of th of Mubarik. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Commissioner erred in assessing the monthly wages of the deceased @ instead of Rs. 15,000/- per month with diet allowance; that the compensation awarded is inadequate and ought to have been enhanced by granting future prospects; that interest ought to have been awarded @ 18% per annum as well as on the penalty amount; and impugned order deserves to be modified. No other point has been raised. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO-5108-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.07.2026 OTHERS …Appellants DILBAG SINGH AND ANOTHER …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the order dated ed Commissioner under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923, Gurugram, whereby compensation to the tune of , along with interest @ 12% per annum including penalty to the extent of 50% of the compensation amount, was awarded on account of Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Commissioner erred in assessing the monthly wages of the deceased @ per month with diet allowance; that the ate and ought to have been enhanced by granting future prospects; that interest ought to have been awarded @ 18% per annum as well as on the penalty amount; and consequently, the I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the order dated ed Commissioner under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923, Gurugram, whereby compensation to the tune of penalty to the extent of 50% of the compensation amount, was awarded on account of Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Commissioner erred in assessing the monthly wages of the deceased @ per month with diet allowance; that the ate and ought to have been enhanced by granting future prospects; that interest ought to have been awarded @ 18% consequently, the I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.06 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-5108-2019 (O&M) 4. The contentions raised on behalf of the appellants do not merit acceptance. The learned Commissioner assessed the monthly wages of the deceased @ Rs. 8,000/- per month on the basis of the evidence available on record. Except the oral assertion of the claimants, no documentary evidence was produced to establish that the deceased was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month along with diet allowance. The findings recorded by the learned Commissioner are based on appreciation of evidence and do not suffer from any perversity warranting interference in an appeal under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923. 5. The compensation has been computed strictly in accordance with the statutory formula by applying the relevant factor applicable to the age of the deceased. The claim for addition of future prospects is misconceived, as the compensation under the Employee's Compensation Act is governed by the statutory scheme contained therein. Likewise, the award of interest at the rate of 12% per annum is in conformity with the provisions of the Act. No ground is made out for enhancement of the rate of interest or for awarding interest on the penalty amount. Furthermore, the learned Commissioner already imposed penalty to the extent of 50% after considering the conduct of the employer. 7. The scope of interference under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act is limited to substantial questions of law. The appellants have failed to demonstrate any illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order. 8. Accordingly, finding no merit in the present appeal, the same is hereby dismissed and award dated 29.01.2019 passed by Commissioner, under Employees Compensation Act, 1923 is affirmed. SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.06 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-5108-2019 (O&M) 9. Since the appeal is dismissed, question of limitation is rendered academic. 02.07.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) sanjay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether Reportable? Yes/No SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.06 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document