KIRLOSKAR PNEUMATIC CO.LTD. Vs. SALISH A.K.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, preferred by the first opposite party in ECC No.532/2016 on the files of the Employees Compensation Commissioner (Industrial Tribunal), Thrissur, though carries several assertions and averments, would not require to be considered in detail since the parties have now virtually entered into a consensus that the matter will require to be remanded to the Court of the Compensation Commissioner for reconsideration.

(2.) The appellant alleges that they have no connection with the claimant, namely, the 1st respondent herein and that he was, in fact, an employee of the 2nd respondent-M/s Freestone, with whom also they had no connection whatsoever. According to them, they had contracted certain work with an entity called M/s Salcon, who had in turn sub- contracted the work to M/s Freestone; and that the claimant was working under M/s Freestone. They also impel a contention that the case is not maintainable before the Compensation Commissioner under Section 21(i)(b) of the Employees Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) since the claimant is not an ordinary resident within its territorial limits.

(3.) The claimant, on the other hand, alleges that M/s Salcon and M/s Freestone are one and the same and therefore, that even going by the allegations of the appellant, his immediate employer is M/s Freestone but the principal employer remains the appellant; and therefore, that under Section 12(2) of the Act, they are responsible to deposit the entire Award amount but may be in a position to recover it from M/s Freestone.