Back
P. T. ASHA
Sales Service Company, Rep. by Rajesh Malhotra Managing Partner, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director, The Employees's State Insurance Corporation, Regional Office (Tamil Nadu), Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer in CMA.No.833 of 2022: Appeal is filed under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, to set aside order and decree of Employees State Insurance Court (Principal Labour, Court, Chennai) in EIOP.No.59 of 2015 dated 10.12.2021.
In CMA.No.843 of 2022: Appeal is filed under Section 82(2) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, to allow the appeal and set aside order and decree of Employees State Insurance Court (Principal Labour Court, Chennai) in EIOP No.26 of 2005 dated 23.11.2021.)
Common Judgment
1. Aggrieved by the dismissal of their petitions in EIOP Nos.59 of 2015 and 26 of 2015 by the Employees Insurance Court (Principal Labour Court) Chennai, the appellant is before this Court by filing CMA Nos.833 of 2022 and 843 of 2022. The brief facts are as follows:
2. Facts of the case:
i). The facts are common for both the appeals excepts that there are two orders which are challenged in the above two appeals. The appellant is an establishment which according to them did not engage more than 20 workmen at a given point of time who would qualify to be covered under the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act, hereinafter, for the sake of brevity referred to
The voluntary contribution under the EPF Act does not automatically encompass an establishment under the ESI Act, and the Act cannot be extended to establishments without a notification from the appr....
The functional integrality of the establishments justified their clubbing and coverage under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948.
The court established that employment status must be supported by concrete evidence, and inferences drawn without such evidence are insufficient to impose liability under the Employees’ State Insuran....
The main legal point established is that the apprentices appointed under Certified Standing Orders of a factory are exempted from the purview of the Employees'' State Insurance Act, 1948.
The court established that the presence of more than 10 employees, including Hamals, qualifies the establishment under the applicability of the Employees' State Insurance Act.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the appellant to the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.2082, Labour Department dated 29.08.1983, exempting employees on tour for 7 months ....
Cold storage facilities are classified as 'factories' under the Employees State Insurance Act, as they involve a manufacturing process, necessitating ESI contributions regardless of the number of emp....
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
