IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH JULY 2008 / 26TH ASHADHA 1930 Ins.APP.No. 70 of 2005() -------------------------------- EIC.20/2001 of E.I.COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS : -------------------------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, E.S.I. CORPORATION, THRISSUR. 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, E.S.I. CORPORATION, THRISSUR. 3. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, E.S.I. CORPORATION, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMY, SC, ESI CORPN. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT : ------------------------------------------ M/S. RAGHAM TEXTILES, THALASSERY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MG. PARTNER MR.N.MAMOOD, NARANGAPURAM, THALASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE THIS INSURANCE APPEALS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- Ins. Appeal No. 70 OF 2005 --------------------- Dated this the 17th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Employees' Insurance Court, Kozhikode, in EIC No.20/01. I had earlier disposed of EIC No.17/01. The finding of the ESI court is that the establishment is covered under the Employees' State Insurance Act with effect from 28.6.88 independently and from 19.9.90 independently as well as clubbing with M/s. Ragham Saree Centre and the Corporation is empowered to enforce the provisions of the ESI Act subject to the provisions as to limitation. The ESI Court held that in the light of the decision reported in Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Excel Glasses Ltd. [2003 (3) KLT 42] there is a limitation and so any action initiated beyond the period of five years is not enforceable. The Apex court in the light of the decision reported in Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Santhakumar [2007 (1) KLT 133 (SC)] considered the question of limitation of proceedings under S.45(A) & 77(1A)(b) and held that the question of limitation would arise only when it relates to a claim made by the ESI Corporation before the court and not for a proceeding Ins. Appeal 70/05 2 initiated by it under law. The Apex court also reversed the decision of this court in Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Excel Glasses Ltd. [2003 (3) KLT 42]. Therefore the result of the decision is that there cannot be any limitation for initiation of proceedings by the ESI court against the establishment. So the decision of the ESI court that those claims are barred by limitation and therefore is unenforceable has to be set aside. Exts. D6, D9, D10, D11 and D13 are the proceedings initiated and question of limitation will not arise. I direct the ESI Corporation to pass appropriate orders in all these notices after giving an opportunity of being heard to the applicant namely M/s. Ragham Textiles and only after passing a considered order on hearing, proceedings can be initiated for the purpose of realisation of the amount. The insurance appeal is disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps Ins. Appeal 70/05 3