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

1978 Supreme(Ker) 153

P.NARAYANA PILLAI, GEORGE VADAKKEL
GEORGE MATHEW – Appellant
Versus
EMPLOYEES INSURANANCE CORPORATION – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. In exercise of the power conferred by S.1 (5) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 34 of 1948, authorising appropriate Governments to extend the provisions of the Act to establishments other than factories also, if such establishments were industrial, commercial, agricultural or otherwise, the State Government published a notification on 18 91974 extending the provisions of the Act to six categories of establishments, the third being "shops", with effect from 29 31975 After that when steps were taken to make the appellants comply with the provisions of the Act on the ground that their establishments were shops they resisted and approached the Employees' Insurance Court. There they did not succeed. That is why they have come up here in appeal.

2. The appellants are distributors of cinematograph films. According to them they do not purchase or sell films, but only distribute them and that on commission basis and so their establishments are not shops.

3. In the popular sense places where trade or business is carried on are also shops even if no sale of commodities takes place there. That that is the popular sense in which that word is used in this State is

clear from the








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