IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 Ins.APP.No. 39 of 2007() ------------------------ IC.19/2004 of EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------- THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, E.S.I. CORPORATION, PANCHDEEP BHAVAN, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR-20. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.AJAYAKUMAR, SC, ESI CORPN. RESPONDENT(S): APPLICANT: ----------------------------------------------- M/S. PALCO PLASTICS, PALCO BUILDING, 13/569, K.C. ROAD, CHULLICKAL, KOCHI-682 005, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SHRI AKBAR BADSHA. ADV. SRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP THIS INSURANCE APPEALS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVEREDTHE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== INAP No.39 OF 2007 ===================== Dated this the 31st day of October 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the Employees' Insurance Court, Alappuzha in I.C.No.19 of 2004. The said application was filed by the applicant for a declaration that Ext.P1 notice dated 31.1.2003 proposing to assess E.S.I. contribution on omitted wages relating to the period 1994-95 to 1996-97 is barred by limitation. The E.I.Court held that it is barred by limitation. It is contended that as per the decision of the Apex Court in Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Santhakumar(2007(1) KLT 133(SC) the said approach is erroneous. In the said decision, the Apex Court held that under Section 45A and Section 77(1A)(b) there cannot be limitation for the Corporation to initiate action, but the question of limitation may arise only when it relates to initiation of action by the Corporation through court. The Apex Court also reversed the decision of this Court reported in E.S.I.Corpn v. Excel Glasses Ltd(2003(3) KLT 42). In the light of the decision of the Apex Court, the judgment under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the E.I. Court for fresh INAP No.39 of 2007 -:2:- consideration in the light of the decision reported in 2007(1) KLT 133(SC). The E.I.Court shall issue notice of hearing to all the parties concerned. INAP is disposed of as above. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-