FA/4447/2007 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 4447 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? NO 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not? NO 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment? NO 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any Order made thereunder? NO 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? NO ========================================================= REGIONAL DIRECTOR, ESI CORPORATION - Appellant Versus JAYANTILAL L SHAH – Respondent ========================================================= Appearance : MR JITENDRA MALKAN for the Appellant. MS PARUL P VASAVADA for the Respondent. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI Date : 26/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16-07-2005 passed by Employees State Insurance Court, Rajkot in EI Application No. 13 of FA/4447/2007 2/4 JUDGMENT 1987, whereby the learned Judge allowed the application. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation has preferred the present appeal. 2. Learned Advocate Mr. J. M. Malkan for the appellant submitted that the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the ESI Court mainly on the ground that even though all the five units are dependent on each other, the learned Judge has committed serious error in holding that they are independent entities. It is submitted that as the Accountant, the Chowkidar, etc. are also common for all the five units, the learned Judge ought to have held that all the five units are having functional integrity. It is also submitted that the appellant was not given opportunity to adduce evidence before the learned Judge in order to prove his case and, therefore, the matter requires to be remanded so as to enable the appellant to lead evidence before the ESI Court. The learned Advocate submitted that even otherwise, the order passed by the Trial Court is contrary to the provisions of law and, therefore, also, the matter requires to be remanded to the ESI Court. 3. As against the aforesaid submission, learned Advocate Ms. Parul P. Vasavada representing the respondent vehemently submitted that sufficient reasons are assigned by the learned Judge and, therefore, it is not a fit case for remand and in FA/4447/2007 3/4 JUDGMENT fact, the appeal preferred by the appellant is liable to be dismissed. 4. Heard learned Advocate Mr. J. M. Malkan for the appellant and Ms. Parul P. Vasavada for the respondent at length and in great detail. I have also perused the reasons assigned by the learned Judge in ESI Application No. 13 of 1987. 5. Considering the reasoning assigned by the learned Judge, the five units, namely, M/s Jay Hind Printing Press, M/s Jai Hind Daily, M/s Jai Hind Advertisers, M/s Jai Hind Industrial Agency and M/s Jai Hind Photo Offset are having functional integrity and their Accountant is common and even their Chowkidar is common and, therefore, the submissions of learned Advocate that he wants to lead evidence is well founded since no opportunity was afforded. In that regard, I am of the considered view that the matter requires to be remanded. Hence, I pass the following order: ORDER The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order dated 16-07-2005 passed by the Employees' State Insurance Court, Rajkot in EI Application No. 13 of 1987 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the learned Judge, Employees State Insurance Court, Rajkot to hear the matter afresh and decide the same after giving opportunity to both the FA/4447/2007 4/4 JUDGMENT sides to lead the evidence in the matter. The ESI Court shall decide the matter as early as possible preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of writ of this judgment and order. There shall be no order as to costs. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. [H. B. ANTANI, J.] /shamnath