THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO. C.M.A.No. 2050 of 2002. JUDGEMENT This appeal is filed against the Award dt. 28.5.2001 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Hyderabad-II in W.C.No. 95 of 2000. The applicant before the Commissioner is the appellant herein. He filed the present appeal questioning the Award passed by the learned Commissioner on the ground that computing of compensation is not in accordance with law and it requires to be enhanced. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent- Insurance Company. The learned Commissioner gave findings that the appellant was a workman under the 1st respondent and he sustained injuries in an accident during the course of employment and that the 2nd respondent insurance company is liable to pay compensation. As all these findings have attained finality, they need not be considered again in the present appeal. The point that arises for determination in this appeal is whether the compensation granted by the learned Commissioner is just and reasonable or it requires to be enhanced. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant that though as per the evidence of the Doctor (Pw.2), the appellant sustained 50% disability, due to the facture sustained by him, the disability in consequence thereof can be considered to be total since the appellant is not able to work as a driver any longer. As consequent on the disability sustained by the appellant in the accident, he is not in a position to work as a driver forever, the disability sustained by the appellant can be considered to be total, as contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant. The learned Counsel for the appellant would submit that the wages of the appellant at Rs. 1000/- p.m. considered by the learned Commissioner is not proper. According to the learned Counsel the wages for the workman can be taken at Rs. 4,000/-. Since the accident took place in the year 1994, in my view, the Commissioner rightly considered the wages of the appellant at Rs. 1000/- p.m. and it requires no interference in this appeal. As per the Workmen’s Compensation Act, relevant factor was rightly applied by the learned Commissioner for computing the compensation. The only aspect that is to be considered is with regard to percentage of disability. Since, the appellant is not able to work as a driver any longer, the disability can be taken to be total instead of 50% as fixed by the learned Commissioner. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for compensation of Rs. 84,720/-(Rs. 42,360 plus 42,360). The respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent that pursuant to the order passed by the Tribunal, the 2nd respondent deposited the amount of compensation granted. In view of the submission, the 2nd respondent is directed to deposit the remaining amount of Rs. 42,360/- within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in default, the said amount shall carry interest at 6% p.a. till realisation. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ R.KANTHA RAO,J 23.04.2010. KRB. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO. C.M.A.No. 2050 of 2002. Dt. 23.04.2010.