I.S. Tiwana, J. - (1.) THE contention raised here in this petition relates to the jurisdiction of the trial Court i.e. Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Ambala Cantt. His order, dated October 16, 1985, holding that the Civil Court has the jurisdiction to try the dispute i.e. as to whether the Plaintiff -concern (now Respondent) is covered by the Employees, State Insurance Act, 1948, (for short, the Act), is in question.
(2.) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the parties at so: ne length, I find that the impugned order is patently illegal and deserves to be set aside. The facts relevant to the controversy are that the resp indent filed a suit for permanent injunction to restrain the Petitioner -Corporation from recovering Rs. 20,972 or any other amount under the Act on the plea that its factory was not covered by the Act. As against this, the plea of the Petitioner was that the amount sought to be recovered from the Respondent was duly processed in accordance with the procedure' prescribed under the Act and he concern of the Respondent was squarely covered under the Act. It was also maintained on behalf of the Petitioner that the civil court had no jurisdiction to try the suit in view of Sub -section (3) of Section 75 of the Act. In the light of the pleadings of the parties, he trial Court framed a number of issues, including the one as to. "Whether this Court has no jurisdiction to try this case, as alleged OPD". This later issue has been disposed of as a preliminary issue with the conclusion already noticed above.
(3.) AS pointed out earlier, I am of the opinion that the issue as to whether the factory of the Respondent is covered by the Act ii Us squarely within the competence of the Employees Insurance Cojrt under the Act and the civil court has no jurisdiction to try the sa ne in the light of the provisions of Section 75(1)(g) and Sub -section (3) of the same. These latter -mentioned provisions read: (1) If any question or dispute arises as to - - (g) any other matter which is in dispute between a principal employer and the Corporation or between a principal employer and an immediate employer, or between a person and the Corporation or between an employee and a principal or immediate employer, in respect of any contribution or benefit or other dues payable or recoverable under this Act, or any other matter required to be or which may be decided by the Employees Insurance Court under this Act. 3. No Civil Court shall have jurisdiction to decide or deal with any question or dispute as aforesaid or to adjudicate on any liability which by or under this Act is to be decided by a medical board, or by a medical appeal tribunal or by the Employees Insurance Court.;