- (1.) This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, made on January 30, 1985 in FAO No. 21/85 and C. M. No. 192-OII.
(2.) The appellant-establishment was covered under the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, (for short, the Act). On December 1, 1982, a demand was made of the appellant to contribute the amount under the Act to the fund of the Corporation for the period from 28-1-1968 to 31-10-1979 for the establishment at Bangalore and from 28-1-1968 to 31-8-1979 for the establishment at Indore. Initially, a contention had been raised by the appellant that these establishments are not covered under the Act and there is no relationship of employer and employee between the workmen and the appellant. This controversy was covered by a there Judge Bench decision of this Court in Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. v. Employees State Insurance Corporation, (1996) 2 SCC 682 wherein this Court had held that the appellant is covered by the provisions of the Act and is liable to contribute the amount to the Fund of the Corporation to ensure insurance coverage of the employees working under the appellant. In this appeal, the controversy is as to the limitation and the period from which they are liable to make the contribution.
(3.) The appellants placing reliance on Section 77-A of the Act read with Regulation 26 of the Employees State Insurance (General) Regulation, 1950, as was in operation at the relevant time, contended that the demands are barred by limitation and, therefore, the appellants are not liable to make any contribution for the period in question. With a view to appreciate the contention, it is necessary to look to the provisions of the Act,;