THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, DEFENCE COLONY, PORVORIM GOA Vs. M/S KALANATH TILE WORKS MAPA, PANCHAWADI, GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Mrs. A. Agni, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. V. Palekar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. All the above appeals were taken up together for hearing as the counsels appearing for the respective parties have pointed out that a common question of law arises in the above appeals. The Appeal Under ESI No. 5/2004 came to be admitted by this Court by order dated 29.07.2004 on the following substantial questions of law :

(2.) THE Appeal Under ESI No. 6/2004 came to be admitted by this Court by order dated 29.07.2004 on the following substantial questions of law :

(3.) MRS . A. Agni, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants has assailed the impugned judgments passed by the Court below on the ground that there is no period of limitation prescribed in the Act to claim the contribution under ESI Act. The learned Counsel further pointed out that the provisions of Section of the said Act are applicable only in cases where a claim is put forward before the Court and such period does not hold good for recovery by the appellants from the concerned employer. The learned Counsel further pointed out that in the Appeal Under ESI Nos. 5/2004 and 6/2004, the recovery sought to be made by the appellants is on account of damages whereas in Appeal Under ESI No. 7/2004, the amount sought to be claimed by the appellant is on account of the contribution by the employer in accordance with ESI Act. The learned Counsel further pointed out that there is no period of limitation prescribed under the ESI Act for the recovery of such amount and as such the impugned judgments cannot be sustained and deserve to be quashed and set aside. The learned Counsel in support of her submissions has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court reported in, 2007(1) SCC page 584 in the case of ESI Corpn. V/s C.C. Santhakumar. The learned Counsel as such submitted that the impugned judgments deserve to be quashed and set aside and the matters be directed to be heard by the Court below in accordance with law.