P. B. MAJMUDAR, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is filed by Employees state Insurance Corporation under section 82 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 [hereinafter referred to as the ESI Act.

( 2 ) AN appeal under section 82 of the esi Act would be maintainable only when there is a substantial question of law. However, looking to the scheme of the Act, it is not necessary that substantial question of law is required to be framed by the Judge like second appeal under the provisions of civil Procedure Code. Section 82 of the ESI Act reads as under:

"82. Appeal. (1 ). Save as expressly provided in this section, no appeal shall lie from an order of an Employees Insurance Court. (2 ). An appeal shall lie to the High court from an order of an Employees insurance Court if it involved a substantial question of law. (3 ). The period of limitation for an appeal under this section shall be sixty days. (4 ). The provisions of section 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act 1963 (36 of 1963)shall apply to appeals under this section. "

So far as section 100 of the Civil procedure Code is concerned, the same reads as under:

"100. Second Appeal. (1 ). Save as otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie to the High Court from every decree passed in appeal by any Court subordinate to the High Court, if the High court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law. (2 ). An appeal may lie under this section from an appellate decree passed ex parte. (3 ). In an appeal under this section, the memorandum of appeal shall precisely state the substantial question of law involved in the appeal. (4 ). Where the High Court is satisfied that a substantial question of law is involved in any case, it shall formulate that question. (5 ). The appeal shall be heard on the question so formulated and the respondent shall, at the hearing of the appeal, be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such question: provided that nothing in this subsection shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear, for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law, not formulated by it, if it is satisfied that the case involves such question. "

( 3 ) IT is required to be noted that by virtue of amendment in CPC in the year 1976, in a second appeal, the Court is required to frame substantial question of law at the time of entertaining the second appeal. Such is not the position so far as appeal under the ESI Act is concerned. Even prior to 1976 amendment of CPC, second appeal was maintainable on question of law only, but there was no provision for framing such question by the Court while entertaining the appeal. So far as appeal under section 82 of the ESI Act is concerned, the provision for entertaining such appeal on substantial question of law is there from the very beginning. However, the Courts never used to frame any substantial question of law so far as the appeal under the ESI act is concerned.

( 4 ) IT is required to be noted that if substantial question of law is to be framed in an appeal under section 82 of the ESI act as like the appeal under section 100 of cpc, the appeal is required to be heard only on the questions so formulated, and the court may permit the parties to argue on such questions not formulated if it is satisfied that the case involves such question. Scheme of section 100, CPC and section 82 of ESI act is altogether different and in the later case, the Court is not required to frame substantial questions as like the one under section 100, CPC. It is not necessary to formulate substantial question of law as no such duty is cast on the Court as like section 100, CPC. Language of section 100, CPC and section 82 of the ESI Act is different so far as this question is concerned. In that view of the matter, it is not necessary to frame any substantial question of law at the time of admitting the appeal under the ESI Act

Click Here to Read the rest of this document