Appeal against judgment of single Judge under clause 15 of Letters Patent maintainable.

L.P.A. No. 53 of 1993 was filed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) against the judgment and decree of a learned single Judge of this Court dated December 16, 1991 in C.M.A. No. 554 of 1985 dismissing the appeal filed by the Corporation against the order of the Principal District Judge, Coimbatore, in E.S.I. O.P. No. 283 of 1983

2. L.P.A. No. 179 of 1993 was filed by the Proprietor of Madras Type Foundry against the judgment and decree of a learned single Judge of this Court dated October 24, 1991 in C.M.A. No. 469 of 1984 dismissing the appeal filed against the order of the First Additional District Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, in E.S.I. O.P. No. 26 of 1983

3. L.P.A. No. 148 of 1995 was filed by the Corporation against the judgment and decree of a learned single Judge of this Court dated September 7, 1994 in C.M.A. No. 933 of 1986 dismissing the appeal filed against the order of the First Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, in E.S.I. O.P. No. 59 of 1983

4. L.P.A. No. 257 of 1995 was filed by the Corporation against the judgment and decree of a learned single Judge of this Court dated April 3, 1995 in C.M.A. No. 908 of 1986 allowing the appeal filed by Devi Designers and Decorators, Madras-41 against the order of the First Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, in E.S.I. O.P. No. 14 of 1985

5. When these appeals were taken up for hearing, Mr. S. R. Sundaram, learned counsel appearing for the respondent in L.P.A. No. 53 of 1993, raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the Letters Patent Appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent

6. On February 18, 1997, when L.P.A. Nos. 148 and 257 of 1995 came up for hearing before us, we passed the following orderBoth the Letters Patent Appeals were filed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation by its Regional Director against the order in C.M.A. No.933 of 1986 dated September 7, 1994 and C.M.A. No. 908 of 1986 dated April 3, 1995. When the appeals were listed for hearing, learned counsel for the respondent in both the appeals filed a memo raising an objection about the maintainability of the Letters Patent Appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent and that the learned counsel for the respondent intends to raise the above issue as a preliminary issue by virtue of Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act. In the memofiled in L.P.A. No. 257 of 1986, apart from raising the lea of maintainability under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, another objection has also been raised by the counsel for the respondent stating that the appellant/Employees' State Insurance Corporation has not obtained leave to prefer the above appeal from the learned single Judge in pursuance of Rule 28 of the Appellate Side Rules, since it is a question of law of public importance, we issue notice to the Additional Solicitor General, Southern Region, Madras, Mr. G. Masilamani, and also to the Presidents of the Madras Bar Association, the Madras High Court Advocates Association requesting them to assist the Court in deciding the question of maintainability of the Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in an appeal filed under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act. We also request the learned Senior Counsel who are willing, to assist the Court

Post the appeals on February, 27, 1997.

"7. The Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (Act 34 of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was enacted by the Dominion Legislature and was assented to by the Governor General of India on April 19, 1948. Under Section 1(3) of the Act, that Act was brought into force by notification in the Official Gazette. From Volume 18 of the Civil Court Manual published by the Madras Law Journal, it is found that Chapters 1, 2, 3 and 8 of the Act came into force on September 1, 1948 in all the Provinces in India and Section 77 to 79 and 81 of Chapte