IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2008 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1930 MFA.No. 70 of 2003(B) --------------------- ICA.1/2002 of ESI COURT, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT: APPELLANT: ---------------------------------------- C.I.GRACY W/O. ANTONY, KOLLANNUR HOUSE, KOKKATH KAINUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------- E.S.I. CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR, THRISSUR-20. BY SRI.AJAYA KUMAR, SC, ESI CORPORATION THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.F.A. No. 70 OF 2003 --------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Employees' Insurance Court, Palakkad, in ICA No.1/02. The said court accepted the Board's disability certificate and answered the point accordingly. There is no dispute that the injury sustained will come under Schedule II of the Emplyees' State Insurance Act item 44, which deals with traumatic amputation of tip without loss of bone the permanent disability is 2%. When the statute prescribes the percentage and the Board decides the question on the basis of the materials available before it and taking into consideration the object of the legislation as well, one cannot find fault with the authority for arriving at a decision accepting the Board's fixation of percentage strictly in accordance with the statutory provisions. Being a statutory provision regarding the percentage sitting in the appeal, this court also cannot interfere as it will be exceeding the limits of jurisdiction. Therefore I do not find any merit in the MFA and the same is accordingly dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps