FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURNAGABAD Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directios and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS __________________________________________________________________________________________ 901 FA/1120/2011 THE DIRECTOR,EMPLOYEES STATE INSURSURANCE CORPN. VERSUS M/S FAMOUR SODA SHOP AND ANOTHER ... Advocate(s) for Petitioner: Shri V D Sonwane Advocate(s) for Respondent 1: Advocate(s) for Respondent 2: Advocate(s) for Respondent 3: Advocate(s) for Respondent 4: Advocate(s) for Respondent 5: G V Wani ... CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. Dated: June 28, 2011 ... 1 Original opponent is challenging the order passed in application _ no. 2/1995 by the Judge, Labour Judge, Jalgaon on 26-11-1999. 2 Respondents herein presented application under Rule 75 of the ESI Act before the trial court. Applicant is the registered partnership firm engaged in marketing of cold-drinks. Original opponent issued ex-parte order fixing liability in respect of recovery of dues to the tune of Rs. 11,620/- for a period FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURNAGABAD Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directios and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS __________________________________________________________________________________________ between 1-12-1989 to 31-8-1990. There were two applicants who tendered applications before the trial court; those were M/s Famous Soda shop and M/s Ruchi and both the applications were taken up together for consideration. According to the applicants, there is no functional integrity and the number of employees is less than the prescribed limit and as such they are not liable to pay the contribution as demanded. After considering the rival contentions, trial court allowed the applications and quashed notice issued by original opponent / appellant herein. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the trial court, original opponent has approached this court by presenting instant appeal. 3 I have perused the reasons recorded by the trial court. I do not find any apparent error committed by the trial court while deciding the matter. Apart from this, it has been pointed out that appeal presented against one of the applicants i.e. M/s Ruchi bearing First Appeal no. 7/2004 has been dismissed by FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURNAGABAD Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directios and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS __________________________________________________________________________________________ this court for want of prosecution and no steps are taken for restoration of the appeal. Order of dismissal is dated 13-8-2004. As the common order passed by the trial court has been confirmed as against one of the joint applicants, instant appeal presented against another applicant by the original opponent does not deserve any consideration. Appeal is devoid of substance hence stands dismissed. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb