Disposed

S. Radhakrishnapillai v. the Provident Fund Commissioner

Kerala HC3 Dec 2012WP(C)/26109/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging EPF property attachment, the Court directed the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioners request to lift attachment upon payment of disputed dues, allowing hearing to the petitioner within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed 3rd respondent to consider petitioners request to lift property attachment within three weeks if dues of Rs. 1,80,772/- are remitted.

S. Radhakrishnapillai Vs the Provident Fund Commissioner — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID

¶4

MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/12TH AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 26109 of 2012 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

S. RADHAKRISHNAPILLAI S/O. G.SAHADEVAPILLAI, PROPRIETOR BHARANI CASHEW PRODUCTS, KALLUMITHAZHAM P.O. KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM-4.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEWS

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

THE PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.

¶11

THE RECOVERY OFFICER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 3. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, PONNAMMA CHAMBERS KOLLAM-691 001. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOLLAM-691 001. R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER G GOPAKUMAR R BY SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR,SC,EPF ORGN

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C)26109/12

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXTS.

EXT.P1	COPY OF THE ORDER OF ATTACHMENT DATED 13.3.2006 ISSUED BY R3.
EXT.P2	COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19.10.2006 FOR SETTLING SALE PROCLAMATION.
EXT.P3	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.11.2006 IN WP(C)NO.29690/06.
EXT.P4	COPY OF THE PROCLAMATION OF SALE DATED 13.11.2006.
EXT.P5	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.1.2007 IN WA NO.175/2007.
EXT.P6	COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 4.4.12 SENT BY REGISTERED POST ADDRESSED TO R3.

Lgk

//true copy//

PA TO JUDGE

HARUN-UL-RASHID,J.

¶21

W.P.(C) No. 26109 of 2012

¶22

Dated this the 3^rd day of December 2012

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The writ petition is filed seeking mainly the following

¶25

reliefs:

¶26

i) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding respondents 1 to 3 to permit the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 1,18,328.70/- (Rupees One lakh eighteen thousand three hundred and twenty eight and seventy paise) towards the liability under Employees Provident Fund contributions following Exts.P1, P2 and P4 in respect of the cashew unit bearing code No. KR/3176 in two equal installments as full and final settlement of all liabilities.

¶27

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding 2^nd respondent to lift the attachment made on the property in Survey No.552/19 and Survey No.939/5 of Kilikoloor Village, Kollam District after accepting Rs. 1,18328.70 (Rupees One lakh Eighteen thousand three hundred and twenty eight and seventy paise) from the petitioner and drop all proceedings against the property based on Exts.P1, P2 and P4.

¶28

Petitioner submits that the present liability towards Employees' Provident Fund Contribution is Rs.1,18,328.70 (Rupees One lakh eighteen thousand three hundred and twenty eight and seventy paise only) and that he is prepared to pay the said amount and it is requested that on payment, the attachment of property is lifted.

¶29

w.p.(c) No.26109/12

¶30

¶31

Learned Standing Counsel for the 3^rd respondent on instructions submits that the amount due from the petitioner is not Rs.1,18,328.70 but the correct amount is Rs. 1,80,772/-

¶32

Petitioner submitted Ext.P6 representation before the 3^rd respondent requesting the authority to permit him to remit the balance amount and to take urgent steps to withdraw the attachment of the property. The petitioner submits that he is ready and willing to remit Rs. 1,80,772/- which is the balance amount due according to the 3^rd respondent.

¶33

In the circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 3^rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6 request within a period of three weeks from today after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner on condition that the petitioner remits Rs. 1,80,772/- being the balance amount due within a period of ten days from today.

¶34

Sd/- HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE

¶35

al/-

S. Radhakrishnapillai v. the Provident Fund Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Radhakrishnapillai v. the Provident Fund Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Thilakan Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Bessy Babichan Vs Ernakulam District Co-Operative Bank Limited

Sobin Mathew Vs Regional Transport Authority, Kannur

M/S. Super Ply Bend Vs Asst.Provident Fund Commissioner

Pushpa Vs State of Kerala & Others

C.J.Joseph Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police