MC 1077/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. S Roy, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. Talukd ar, learned counsel for the respondent. The applicant, who is the appellant in MFA 22/2011, by the present appli cation has prayed for impleadment of Sri Himangshu Sarma as respondent No. 2 in the appeal contending inter alia that though he is the employer and was party in the proceeding before the learned Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation, he has not been added as party respondent in the appeal inadvertently. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon consideration of the averments made in the application, the prayer for impleadment is allowed. Sri Himangshu Sarma, S/o Sri Hemanta Sarma, Vill. Patharkuchi, Basistha, Dist. K amrup, Assam is impleaded as respondent No. 2 in the appeal. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that th e Insurance Company has not disputed the existence of the insurance coverage cov ering the risk of the employer. Misc. Case stands disposed of.