1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 982 OF 2008 M/s. Lidwin Clara Naronha & Anr. ... Appellants Vs. M/s. Timestin Containers & Anr. ... Respondents Mr. Yogendra M. Pendse, Advocate for the appellants. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 29th September, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard. 2. This is the First Appeal against dismissal of the application under the Workmen’s Compensation Act for enhancement of compensation. 3. To state in brief, one Marcel Naronha, who was working as an employee with the respondent No.1, died while on duty in a fatal accident. The claimants/appellants are widow and minor child of the deceased. The respondent No.1 had taken insurance policy with respondent No.2. Taking into consideration the age of the deceased and the salary disclosed by the respondent No.1, the respondent No.2 had deposited Rs.1,82,697/- as compensation in the Office of the Workmen’s Compensation, Kalol, Gujarat. That amount was withdrawn by the 2 appellants. Later on, they filed an application (WCA) No.429/B.95 of 2006 before the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation at Thane, contending that the deceased was getting salary of Rs.8,500/- and they are entitled to further amount of Rs.1,80,043/- towards compensation. The respondent No.1 did not appear and the matter proceeded ex-parte. The respondent No.2 alone contested the matter. Except the oral word of the appellant No.1, there was no evidence before the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation to prove that the salary of the deceased was Rs.8,500/- per month. Therefore, the claim was dismissed. No document was produced to show the salary of the deceased.It appears that no attempt was made by the appellant to call the records from the office of the respondent No.1 about the salary of the deceased nor any witness was examined from the office of the respondent No1 to prove the salary. In absence of any evidence to show that salary of the deceased was Rs.8,500/-, the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation held that the claim was not proved. Taking into consideration the material on record, it is difficult to find any fault with the impugned judgment. 4. Therefore, the Appeal stands dismissed. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)