The Deputy Director vs The Presidency School
2023 Latest Caselaw 3576 Kant

                                              -1-
                                                    NC: 2023:KHC:21462
                                                       MFA No. 3638 of 2019




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE, 2023

                                           BEFORE

                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

                   MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3638 OF 2019 (ESI)

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
                         EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION,
                         DOOR NO.5/7/708/11
                         1ST FLOOR, CITY POINT,
                         NAVABHARATH CIRCLE,
                         KODIALBAIL,
                         MANGALORE-575 003.
                                                          ...APPELLANT
                               (BY SRI C.SHASHIKANTHA, ADVOCATE)
                   AND:

                   1.    THE PRESIDENCY SCHOOL
                         KELARAI POST,
                         BONDANTHAILA, KUNTADAKA,
Digitally signed
                         MANGALORE-575 029
by SHARANYA T            REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND
Location: HIGH           MANAGING TRUSTEE OF
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                A.H.MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,
                         MR. NISSAR AHMED
                                                             ...RESPONDENT
                                     (RESPONDENT SERVED)
                        THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 82(2) OF THE ESI
                   ACT, 1948 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.11.2018 PASSED
                   IN ESI.NO.2/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER,
                   LABOUR    COURT,   D.K,  MANGALURU,    ALLOWING    THE
                   APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 75 OF THE ESI ACT.

                        THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
                   THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                -2-
                                      NC: 2023:KHC:21462
                                         MFA No. 3638 of 2019




                          JUDGMENT

This miscellaneous first appeal is filed challenging the

impugned order dated 24.11.2018 passed in E.S.I.No.2/2016,

wherein the Labour Court set aside the claim made by the

appellant herein, in coming to the conclusion that Ex.A11 notice

dated 10.08.2015 is illegal and against the principles of law and

void ab-initio. Hence, they cannot claim the interest and

damages.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that

this Court also held in M.F.A.No.3637/2019 that Ex.A9 is valid

and not bad in law and remanded the matter to the Trial Court

to consider the matter afresh, by giving opportunity to both the

parties. When this Court has held that Ex.A9 is valid and

remanded the matter, this appeal arising out of the claim made

in respect of interest for not making the contribution within

time also requires to be remanded to the Trial Court for fresh

consideration.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant,

though the respondent is served, did not choose to engage any

counsel and when this Court comes to the conclusion that

NC: 2023:KHC:21462 MFA No. 3638 of 2019

Ex.A9 is valid and the matter requires to be considered by the

Trial Court, in the case on hand also, issue involved is with

regard to the claim of interest and the same also can be

adjudicated by the Trial Court by giving an opportunity to both

the appellant as well as the respondent. Hence, the order

impugned requires to be set aside and the matter has to be

remanded to the Trial Court for fresh consideration.

4. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed.

(ii) The impugned order dated 24.11.2018 passed in E.S.I.No.2/2016 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Trial Court to consider the same afresh by giving opportunity to both the appellant and respondent and even if the Trial Court comes to the conclusion that the matter has to be enquired by the Deputy Director of ESI Corporation, the same can be sent to the said authority for determination.

Sd/-

JUDGE

ST