IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 333 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.1.2011 Garrison Engineer Utility .. Appellant v. Smt. Anju and others ..Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Aman Chaudhary, Advocate for the appellant. ... Rajesh Bindal J. It was not disputed that liability of the contractor and the contractee, namely, the appellant in the present case for liability to pay compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short, `the Act'), is joint and several. Merely because there is a clause in the agreement signed by the contractor (respondent No. 5) for indemnifying the appellant against the claim under the Act will not render the order passed by the Commissioner erroneous. The appellant can avail of its remedy in law to recover the amount from respondent No. 5, in case it is entitled to. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 17.1.2011 mk