Skip to main content

24 years on, HC finds AC room is not cold storage

It took the judiciary 24 years to declare that an air conditioner makes a room cool and does not turn it into a cold storage.

This happened in a case pertaining to a city-based trading firm, Gokaldas Trading Co, which is a commission agent of chocolates, tomato ketchup and other food items. This firm had 10 employees and an AC was installed in the manager's room.

Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) declared it a factory saying it had more than 10 employees and was carrying out manufacturing with the aid of power. It showed an AC as the instrument used in the manufacturing activity.

ESIC concluded that according to Section 2K(vi) of the Factories Act, by employing more than 10 persons and preserving and storing food articles in a cold storage, which is a manufacturing activity, the firm fell in the category of a factory. With this, ESIC sent a notice to the firm, asking it to pay Rs 68,278 as tax from 1983 and 1988.

After due communication with ESIC, the firm filed an application before an ESI court in 1991. This court dismissed the plea requesting that ESI Act should not be made applicable to it merely on the ground that an AC was installed in the manager's room. The firm moved the Gujarat high court in 1994 and argued that the AC was not meant to preserve food items, which were kept in a different room. The AC was used during office hours.

ESIC argued the manager was receiving a salary of just Rs 1,100 and no company would bother to provide AC facility to an employee with such a meager salary. It insisted that the AC was used to keep articles in cold storage.

After hearing the case, the HC said, "This court is of the opinion that the court below (ESI court) committed an error while giving the finding that chocolates, bournvita etc. are preserved in the AC room and the manager's AC chamber is a cold storage."

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/24-years-on-HC-finds-AC-room-is-not-cold-storage/articleshow/49575100.cms

Comments

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Owner of vehicle is not expected to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver

Cause Title : Rishi Pal Singh Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 4919 Of 2022, The Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : July 26, 2022 Corum : Hemant Gupta; J., Vikram Nath; J. Background the truck owned by the appellant met with an accident. The owner deposed before the court that before employing the driver, he had taken his driving test and that he was driving the vehicle satisfactorily and  that the driver was employed with him for 3 years before the date of the accident. He produced his driving license. This was reaffirmed by the driver who deposed that the driving license was obtained from the driver and it was issued from Nagaland, but no such license was produced on record. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have held that the owner has alleged that the driver had a driving license from Nagaland but the same was not produced and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the awarded amount...

Person Being Prosecuted To Be Provided With All Relevant Documents

The Delhi High Court, in the case of Poonam Jain vs Union of India & Ors, noted that a person being prosecuted against has a right to be provided with all the material relied upon by the prosecuting agency to prosecute her/ him. In the instant case, a search was conducted at the residences of the petitioners and their statements were recorded and several documents were seized. They were issued show cause notices under Section 276 C(1) and Section 277 of the Income Tax Act, Section 181 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 50 and 51 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act. They sought to be provided with a copy of their statements and the documents seised. However, the same was denied to them.