THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR EMPLOYEES’ v. Smt. Supriya S. Bandal, Proprietress, M/s. Shree Radhakrishna
Case at a glance
- Bench
- A S OKA
Outcome
Allowed
Revision Application is allowed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. The applicant filed a complaint against contesting respondents for the offence under section 85 (a) of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) which is punishable under section 85 (i) (b) of the said Act. The allegation in…
Judgment
Mr. H. V. Mehta for the Applicant. Mr. S.V. Gajare, APP for the State. None for the Accused. --- CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATED : JUNE 15, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT :
Heard Shri Mehta, learned counsel for the applicant in support of the Revision Application. None appears for the contesting respondents. 2
The applicant filed a complaint against contesting respondents for the offence under section 85 (a) of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) which is punishable under section 85 (i) (b) of the said Act. The allegation in the complaint against the respondents accused is that the respondents accused have failed to pay contribution as required by law and therefore, they have committed an offence and accordingly, the process was issued on the said complaint.
During the pendency of the complaint, an application was made by the accused on the basis of decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Common
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Revision Application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.