IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2009 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1930 Ins.APP.No. 20 of 2006() ------------------------ APPELLANT/OPPOSITE PARTY: --------------------------------- E.S.I. CORPORATION, PANCHADEEP BHAVAN, NORTH SWARAJ ROUND, THRISSUR-680 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.AJAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT/APPLICANT: ----------------------------- MERCHEM LIMITED, 111/727-A, MUTHINAGAM ROAD, ELOOR, UDYOGAMANDAL (PO), ALUVA-683 501, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR THIS INSURANCE APPEALS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Ins.Appl.No.20 of 2006 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of March 2009 J U D G M E N T BASANT,J The appellant is the E.S.I Corporation and the appellant is aggrieved by the impugned order under which it was held that the claim of the E.S.I Corporation is barred by limitation. Accordingly, the impugned order was passed setting aside the order demanding payment. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits and the learned counsel for the respondent accepts that in the light of the decision in Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Santhakumar [2007(1)KLT 133(SC)] the plea of limitation cannot help the respondent/petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that in the light of the binding precedent in Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Santhakumar (Supra) overruling the earlier decision of this court in E.S.I Corporation v. Excel Glasses Ltd. [2003(3)KLT 42(FB)] other questions were not considered by the Employees Insurance Court. It is prayed that, in these circumstances, the matter may M.A.C.A.No.20/06 2 be sent back to the Employees Insurance Court to consider the matter afresh in the light of the decision in Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Santhakumar (Supra). That request was accepted by the learned counsel for the appellant. 3. In the result, a) This appeal is allowed in part. b) The impugned order is set aside and the Employees Insurance Court is directed to dispose of I.C.No.9/2004 afresh in accordance with law in the light of the decision in Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Santhakumar (Supra). (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jsr M.A.C.A.No.20/06 3 M.A.C.A.No.20/06 4 R.BASANT &C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 06/02/2009