Back
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
Ajay Raj Shetty – Appellant
Versus
Director – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been preferred by the Appellant against the Final Judgment and Order dated 08.12.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Impugned Order’) passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the ‘High Court’), by which Criminal Revision Petition No.164 of 2015 filed by the Appellant and Respondent No.2 has been dismissed.
BRIEF FACTS:
3. M/s Electriex (India) Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘Respondent No.2’ or ‘Company’) was declared as a sick industry by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BIFR’) on 31.10.2001 in Case No.49/2000. On 24.09.2002, the BIFR ordered for a change in the management of Respondent No.2. Aggrieved by this Order, Respondent No.2 preferred Appeal No.340/2002 before the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter to referred to as the ‘AAIFR’). Such appeal was dismissed vide AAIFR’s Order dated 15.01.2003. Following this, Respondent No.2 filed Writ Petition No.20033/2003 before the High Court and it is relevant to note that the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referr
The court affirmed that under the Employees’ State Insurance Act, employers are strictly liable for non-remittance of deducted contributions, with the Appellant's designation as General Manager estab....
Belated payment of contribution - Payment of contribution under the ESI Act is a statutory liability and the ESI Corporation has no power to grant waiver
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a subsequent transferee may not be liable for belated payment of contribution under the ESI Act if there is no mens rea on their part, and the....
Directors of a company can be held individually liable for statutory contraventions under the Employees' State Insurance Act irrespective of management roles.
The court found the initial order erroneous due to misreading evidence, confirming the Appellant’s non-liability under the Employees State Insurance Act after business seizure.
The occupier of a factory is not personally liable for ESIC dues unless they have ultimate control over the factory's affairs; liability rests with the company.
Payments for transport charges do not constitute wages under the Employees' State Insurance Act, and contractors are not considered employees as per the Act's definitions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the joint and several liability of the transferee and the transferrer under Section 93A of the Employees State Insurance Act.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
