The Employees State Insurance v. M/S Daya Engineering Works Ltd
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.353 of 2006 ======================================================
1. The Employees State Insurance Corporation through its Regional Director, Panchdeep Bhawan, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marh, Bailey Road, Patna.
2. The Assistant Regional Director E.S.I. Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
3. Recovery Officer, Office of the E.S.I. Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, Patna.
...........Opposite Parties...........Appellants
Versus
M/S Daya Engineering Works Ltd. through its Technical Director, Dobhi Road Rampur Gaya in the District of Gaya.
..............Applicant............Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Bijpurya, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ORAL ORDER 07-01-2015 Heard the parties.
2. This is an appeal preferred against the Order dated 19th May, 2006 passed by Presiding Officer, Labour Court and Employee's Insurance Court, Patna in E.S.I. Case No. 7 of 1998.
3. This appeal has been preferred much beyond the period of limitation prescribed and one interlocutory
Patna High Court MA No.353 of 2006 (12) dt.07-01-2015 2/2 application, bearing no. 6577 of 2009, filed on 15th October, 2009 after much pursuance in paragraph no. 3, wherein, it is stated that "That the order under appeal was passed on 19.05.06 and the lawyer concerned of the Court below informed about the order on 4.8.06 and certified copy of the order has also been delivered" and, thereafter, further processes were taken and the appellants have decided to prefer this appeal, but there is nothing on the record to substantiate the assertions made in paragraph no. 3 aforestated.
4. In absence whereof, there is no reason to condone the delay. Hence, the Interlocutory Application No. 6577 of 2009 is dismissed; consequently, this appeal. (Akhilesh Chandra, J) Praveen-II/- U T