RAMACHANDRA AYYAR, J

Per Ramachandra Ayyar, JThis appeal raises a question as to the sustainability of a demand for contribution from an employer under the Employees' State Insurance Act (Act XXXIV of 1948) which, for the sake of brevity, will be referred to hereafter as the Act. The respondent was the proprietor of Pakshiraja Studios in Coimbatore. The studio was engaged in the production of cinematograph films. A number of buildings constituted this "studios, " all of them being situate in the same compound. The work in the studio was done in the following departments :-

(1) Electrical.

(2) Camera.

(3) Sound.

(4) Setting.

(5) Moulding.

(6) Carpentry.

(7) Laboratory.

(8) Editing.

(9) Office and watch and ward.

(10) Art.

(11) Makeup.

Electric power was utilized in connexion with some of these items of the work in the studio. If all the departments were taken into account, the number of persons employed would admittedly exceed 20. But the same could not be said, if each of the departments was taken by itself. The carpentry department, which employed more than 10 but less than 20 persons, was notified as a factory under the Factories Act. As the other departments employed less than 10