The single judge of the Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging an EPF Tribunal order levying damages. Upon hearing counsel, the court directed the petitioner to pay an additional sum of Rs. 10,000 to adjudge the matter.
Direction to pay Rs. 10,000 by demand draft within one month.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY
SATURDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1933
WP(C).No. 33231 of 2005(F)
--------------------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------------
MAIKAD TILE WORKS, MAIKAD P.O., ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
BY ADVS. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI.
RESPONDENTS:
------------------------
1. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI.
2. ASST.PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, KALOOR, COCHIN-682 017.
3. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, SC, E.P.F, R3 BY SRI.P.M.POULOSE, ADDL.CGSC.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).NO.33231/2005-F:
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 21/01/2003 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE BALANCE-SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31/03/2002.
EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 06/12/2000 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 22/10/2002 RECEIVED FROM THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 28/10/2004 FROM THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 24/12/2004 OF THE R.1.
EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 28/06/2005 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 11/07/05 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL WITHOUT ANNEXURES FILED BEFORE THE R.1. BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 14TH SEPTEMBER, 2005.
EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.1. DTD. 27/09/05.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
Prv.
B.P. RAY, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 33231 of 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of November, 2011.
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
25,000/- and another sum of 10,000/- will be paid within one month from today. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that the 2nd respondent is satisfied with the same.W.P.(C). No33231/2005.
-:2:-
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE.
rv
W.P.(C). No33231/2005. -:3:-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner was entitled to relief in the writ petition challenging the impugned order levying damages.
Whether the payment of a sum towards the claimed damages should be directed to dispose of the writ petition.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Maikad Tile Works
Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi
Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner
Union of India
B. P. Ray
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court