High Court Kerala High Court

The Regional Director vs M/S.Jeevan Telecasting … on 6 January, 2010

Kerala High Court
The Regional Director vs M/S.Jeevan Telecasting … on 6 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Ins.APP.No. 17 of 2008()


1. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. M/S.JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPORATION
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.V.AJAYAKUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.A.V.XAVIER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :06/01/2010

 O R D E R
                      M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
                      ---------------------------
                  INS.APPEAL.No. 17 OF 2008
                      ---------------------------
           Dated this the 6th day of January, 2010

                        J U D G M E N T

~~~~~~~~~~~

This appeal is preferred against the order of the

Employees Insurance Court, Alappuzha, in I.C.No.93/2006. The

establishment was directed to pay damages of Rs.19,106/- and

to set aside the same, the Employees Insurance Court was

moved. It is contended by the establishment that there was no

willful laches and the delay occasioned on account of the

unavoidable financial crisis. Now, it is the fairly well settled

position that the mere delay in payment shall not be a ground

to impose damages. There must be mens rea, contumacious

conduct or deliberate evadement of payment. As seen from the

order of the court below, the reason for the delay is on account

of financial crisis beyond the control. There was no deliberate

attempt to delay the payment. Recently, a Division Bench of this

Court in the decision reported in Regional Director, E.S.I.

Corporation and another v. Managing Director,

M/s.Qetcos Ltd [ILR 2008(3)132] had held that in all cases

INAP.No.17/2008 2

damages need not be levied, if it is proved to the satisfaction of

the Court that there was no mens rea or contumacious conduct.

Therefore, applying the dictum and to the facts of the present

case, it has to be held that the discretion has been properly

exercised by the court below. Therefore, the appeal lacks merits

and dismissed.

(M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE)

ps