SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(SC) 1467

MARKANDEY KATJU, ASOK KUMAR GANGULY
Fertilizers & Chemicals Travancore Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Regional Director, ESIC – Respondent


Judgment :

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. These appeals have been filed against the common impugned judgment and order dated 30.10.2002 of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam whereby the appeal filed by the respondent-Employees State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter for short the ESIC) under Section 82(2) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter for short the Act) has been allowed and the appeal filed by the appellant herein has been dismissed.

3. It appears that a demand notice was sent against the appellant company under Section 45A of the Act in respect of the employers contribution under the Act. The appellant challenged the said demand notice by filing a petition under Section 75 of the Act before the Employees Insurance Court, Alleppey. The Employees Insurance Court in its order dated 4.2.1993 made the following observations:-

"12. If reliance is made on the rational laid down by the High Court in the abovesaid decisions it is very clear that the identities of the employees should be an essential factor for bringing under coverage employees and paying contribution in respect of them. Here, in this case, because of the peculiar nature of the work
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top