M/S Magus Customer Dialog v. The Deputy Director

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.03.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM C.M.A.No.1463 of 2018 C.M.P.No.11671 of 2018 M/s.Magus Customer Dialog Pvt. Ltd Rajarajan Mansion, 4th floor MNO Complex, 68/1, Greams Road, Chennai-600 006.

..

Appellant/Petitioner vs.

1.The Deputy Director, The Employees State Insurance Corporation, 143, Sterling Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34.

2.The Manager Citi Bank, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002.

(formal party & this 2nd Respondent given up by Appellant) .. Respondents/Respondents PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 82(2) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, against the order and decree dated 16.03.2018 in E.I.O.P.No.59 of 2006 passed by the learned Judge, Principal Labour Court, (Employees' Insurance Court), Chennai.

For Appellant : Mr.Anand Gopalan for M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co For Respondents :Mr.S.P.Srinivasan for R1 R2-Given up

O R D E R

The order dated 16.03.2018 passed in E.I.O.P.No.59 of 2006 is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant mainly contended that the Employees Insurance Court has extracted the pleadings of the parties and dismissed the appeal without any adjudication or findings with reference to the

issues as well as the evidence produced by the parties.

3. On perusal of the order, it reveals that in 13 page judgment, upto paragraph No.15, pleadings are extracted. In paragraph No.16, the Employees Insurance Court arrived a conclusion that the appellant is bound the pay the amount claimed by the respondent. It is further stated that on perusal of the records, the claim of the respondents is rightful and legally valid. Except the general observation, the Employees Insurance Court has not decided the issues with reference to the documents and evidence produced by the parties. Appeals under Section 75 of the ESI Act are to be adjudicated on merits and in accordance with law and by affording opportunity to the parties. The appeal being a first appeal, the factual aspects are to be considered and the findings are to be arrived by the Employees Insurance Court.

However, in the present case, no such exercise has been done by the Employees Insurance Court. Contrarily, the pleadings were recorded and the petition was dismissed by merely stating that the claim of the respondent is rightful and legally valid. Such finding is insufficient for the purpose of satisfying the application of mind to be exercised.

4. This being the factum, this Court is of the opinion that the matter deserves to be remanded back for reconsideration. Accordingly, the order dated 16.03.2018 passed in E.I.O.P.No.59 of 2006 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Employees Insurance Court [Principal Labour Court, Chennai] for fresh adjudication by affording opportunity to all the parties and dispose of the appeal on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Judge, Principal Labour Court, (Employees' Insurance Court), Chennai.

2.The Deputy Director, The Employees State Insurance Corporation, 143, Sterling Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34.

+1cc to M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co, Advocate Sr.NO.15046 +1cc to Mr.S.P.Srinivasan, Advocate Sr.NO.15102 C.M.A.No.1463 of 2018 CA(CO) NR 16/04/2021