Dismissed

E.S.I. Corporation v. Chaya Industries Ltd.Nida Kanjikode

Kerala HC20 Jan 2016Ins.APP/9/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal is dismissed on the ground that the Employees' Insurance Court's decision to waive damages for a specific period was based on a finding of fact regarding 'wilful' non-payment. Such factual findings are not challengeable under Section 82(2) of the Act.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed by the Corporation challenging the Insurance Court's waiver of damages was dismissed.

E.S.I. Corporation Vs Chaya Industries Ltd.Nida Kanjikode — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/30TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

Ins.APP.No. 9 of 2008

¶6

IC 40/2005 OF EMPLOYEES' INSURANCE COURT, PALAKKAD.

¶7

APPELLANT/OPPOSITE PARTIES:

¶8

1. EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR,

¶9

ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR.

¶10

2. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, ESI CORPORATION, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL

¶12

RESPONDENT/APPLICANT:

¶13

CHAYA INDUSTRIES LTD., NIDA KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD, REP. BY ITS MANAGER (P & A).

¶14

THIS INSURANCE APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

mbr/

¶16

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶17

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶18

Ins.Appeal.No.9 of 2008.

¶19

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶20

Dated this the 20^th day of January, 2016.

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

The decision of the Employees' Insurance Court,

¶23

Palakkad in I.C.No.40 of 2005 dated 9.7.2007 is under challenge in this appeal.

¶24

The respondent was an establishment covered under the Employees' State Insurance Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short. There was delay in the matter of remitting the contributions payable by the respondent in respect of their employees for the period from April, 1996 to March, 1997 as also for the period from October, 1999 to May, 2002. The Corporation, in the circumstances, initiated proceedings against the respondent for levying damages as provided for under Section 85B of the Act. Ext.A4 is the order issued by the Corporation against the respondent in that connection. As per Ext.A4,

¶25

¶26

Ins.Appeal.No.9/2008.

¶27

the damages payable by the respondent was determined at Rs.88,170/-. The respondent challenged Ext.A4 order before the Employees' Insurance Court contending mainly that they were facing acute financial constraints during the relevant period and therefore it cannot be said that the non payment of the contribution was wilful so as to justify levy of damages under Section 85B of the Act. The Insurance Court, based on the materials produced by the respondent, found that the respondent establishment was running on loss for the period from April, 2001 to May, 2002. In the circumstances, it directed the Corporation to waive the damages for the said period. The damages in relation to the remaining period was, however, confirmed. Aggrieved by the said decision of the Insurance Court, the Employees' State Insurance Corporation has come up in this appeal.

¶28

A reading of the impugned judgment indicates that the Insurance Court, on a reconsideration of the materials on record, came to the conclusion that the

¶29

Ins.Appeal.No.9/2008.

¶30

non-payment of contribution by the respondent for the period from April, 2001 to May, 2002 was not wilful. It is on the basis of the said finding that the Insurance Court directed the Corporation to waive the damages levied in respect of the said period. The question as to whether the non-payment of the contribution for the aforesaid period by the respondent is wilful is a pure question of fact. The finding on such a question cannot be challenged in an appeal preferred under Section 82(2) of the Act. The appeal, in the said circumstances, is devoid of any merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶31

Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR,

¶32

Kvs/-

¶33

// true copy //

¶34

PA TO JUDGE.

E.S.I. Corporation v. Chaya Industries Ltd.Nida Kanjikode

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.S.I. Corporation v. Chaya Industries Ltd.Nida Kanjikode

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.a.Balabhadran Vs K.Lakshmidevi

State of Kerala Vs Malathi

A.P.Sharbeena Vs Sajjad Saheer

The Regional Director Vs Seenath.K.P

Moothoran @ Sreedharan Vs Ibrahim

Puthiya Purayil Narayani Vs Kunhimangalavan Cheriya Kunhiraman