Inadequate Explanation Under Section 313 CrPC Cannot Be Foundation For Conviction If Prosecution Fails To Prove Case: Allahabad High Court No-Confidence Motion In Housing Societies Fails If 2/3 Majority Not Met; Fractions In Voting Threshold Cannot Be Rounded Down: Bombay High Court Successor Rent Controller Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence Or Act As Appellate Court Under Review Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Restores Eviction Order Article 21 Overrides PMLA Section 45 Rigors In Cases Of Unduly Long Incarceration Without Trial: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail To SSC Scam ‘Middleman’ Unregistered Family Partition Deed Recording Past Oral Arrangement Doesn't Require Compulsory Registration: Gujarat High Court Private Banks Acting As Authorised Dealers Under FEMA Amenable To Writ Jurisdiction; Can Refuse Transactions For 'Sanctions-Related' Concerns: Gauhati High Court Non-Examination Of Investigating Officer Not Fatal To Prosecution Case If Eyewitness Testimony Is Credible & Trustworthy: Jharkhand High Court Mere Denial Of Signature Insufficient When Execution Is Proved Through Endorsements: Karnataka High Court Restores Specific Performance Decree Sectarianism Claims Can't Discredit Reliable Testimony Of Child Sexual Abuse Victim: Kerala High Court Upholds Madrassa Teacher's Conviction State Must Prove Specific 'Public Interest' To Exempt Projects From Social Impact Assessment Under Section 10A Land Acquisition Act: Telangana High Court Or 2 Rule 2 CPC |Failure To Seek Specific Performance In Earlier Injunction Suit Bars Subsequent Claim; Readiness & Willingness Must Be Continuous: Madras High Court Exoneration In Departmental Proceedings Does Not Result In Automatic Discharge In Criminal Case: Orissa High Court History Sheet Can Be Opened On 'Reasonable Belief' Even Without Conviction, But Must Be Reviewed After 7 Years Of Good Conduct: Rajasthan High Court

Engaged In Selling And Repairing Electrical Goods Falls In Definition Of “Factory” And “Manufacturing Process”: SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has affirmed the interpretation of the definitions of “Factory” and “manufacturing process” under the Employees State Insurance Act and the Factories Act. The case, which saw M/S J.P.LIGHTS INDIA pitted against The Regional Director E.S.I. Corporation, Bangalore, centered around the classification of the appellant’s business activities under these definitions.

The Bench, comprising of Hon’ble Ms. Justice Hima Kohli and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal, delivered the verdict on July 27th, 2023. The appellant, a sole proprietorship firm, challenged the dismissal of its appeal against the order of the Employees State Insurance Court.

The Court’s judgment extensively explored the terms “Factory” and “manufacturing process,” citing Sections 2(12), 2(14AA) of the Employees State Insurance Act, and Section 2(k) of the Factories Act. The Bench clarified the conditions that define a premises as a “Factory” and the scope of a “manufacturing process.”

In the crucial observation, the Court confirmed that the appellant-firm, engaged in selling and repairing electrical goods, using electrical energy, fell within the definition of a “Factory” and was involved in a “manufacturing process” under both statutes. The ruling upheld the impugned judgment, emphasizing its alignment with statutory provisions.

The Court concluded by dismissing the appeal as meritless, with each party bearing its own expenses. This judgment not only solidifies the legal understanding of these definitions but also sheds light on the application of statutory provisions to specific business scenarios.

Date of Decision: 27th July, 2023

M/S J.P.LIGHTS INDIA vs THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR E.S.I. CORPORATION, BANGALORE

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/27-Jul-2023-SC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News