THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A.No.4225 of 2003 JUDGMENT: Respondent No.1 is an agency dealing in wholesale supply of cool drinks at Rajahmundry. It is covered by the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act (for short ‘the Act’) with effect from 01.04.1997 and it was paying contributions regularly. On 02.02.2000, an Inspector of the appellant Corporation verified the records of respondent No.1 and found that a sum of Rs.4,46,331/- was spent towards loading and unloading of crates of cool drinks during the year 1998-99 by treating it as payment of wages. Notice, dated 15.05.2000, was served on respondent No.1 demanding a sum of Rs.29,012/- as contribution. The notice was challenged by respondent No.1 by filing O.P.No.149 of 2000 in the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry. The O.P. was allowed by the trial Court on 31.01.2003. The same is challenged in this appeal. Heard Sri B.G.Ravindra Reddy learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Ch.Dhanamjaya, learned counsel for respondent No.1. The appellant proceeded on the assumption that apart from the workers engaged by respondent No.1 covered under the Act, some more persons were employed for loading and unloading of the crates. This inference was drawn on the basis of two vouchers issued to two individuals. The case of the respondent No.1 was that it is the duty of the supplier to undertake loading and unloading and only charges would be paid. The two vouchers that were marked in the evidence were issued by two individuals in proof of receipt of the amount for loading and unloading. By no stretch of imagination, the person, who issued the receipt can be said to have been engaged for that purpose. The trial Court assigned cogent reasons in support of its conclusions and this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt: 26.08.2010. kdl