The Kerala High Court dismissed a writ appeal filed by the EPFO against a single judge's order reducing damages under the EPF Act to 25% due to the petitioner's financial crisis, holding the discretion exercised rightly.
The writ appeal was dismissed in limine.
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 THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/27TH SRAVANA, 1936
WA.No. 1143 of 2014 () IN WP(C) NO. 23696 of 2010
----------------------WP(C) 23693/2010 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA ==============
APPELLANT/3RD PARTY:
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN, P.B. NO. 1806 KOZHIKODE-673006, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT P.F. COMMISSIONER(COMPLIANCE DIVISION)
BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,SC, P.F.
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENT:
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE PRESS LTD NO. F-1375, KALLAI ROAD, CHALAPPURAM.P.O. KOZHIKODE-673002, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
SD
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN &
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JJ.
W.A.No.1143 of 2014
Dated this the 18th day of August, 2014
J U D G M E N T
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.
1.Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The substance of this appeal by the Employees Provident Fund Organization is as to the discretionary exercise by the learned single Judge in trimming and confining the amount assessed as damages under the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Learned single Judge found on material facts that the writ petitioner, a co-operative society, was going through unprecedented financial crisis during the relevant time and it was, therefore, disabled from paying the contribution under the Act in time. In our view, the learned single Judge was justified in fixing the damages to be at the rate of 25% of the amount assessed under Section 14 B of the Act. That has been found by the learned single Judge to be
2
W.A.No.1143/14
one that would meet the ends of justice under the circumstances of the case. The discretion has been rightly exercised by the learned single Judge within the format of law including by following the precedents in ESI Corporation v. K.N.Premanandan & another [2007(1) KHC 839] and ESI Corporation v. HMT Limited & another [2008 (1) LLJ 814] . We, therefore, do not find any legal infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned judgment warranting interference in this intra-court appeal under Section 5 of the High Court Act.
In the result, this writ appeal is dismissed in limine.
Sd/- (THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE)
Sd/- (P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE)
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
DG
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the learned single judge was justified in exercising discretion to reduce damages assessed under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Fund Act to 25% considering the petitioner's financial
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
ESI Corporation v. K.N.Premanandan & anotherFollowed¶22
[2007(1) KHC 839]
ESI Corporation v. HMT Limited & anotherFollowed¶22
[2008 (1) LLJ 814]
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Employees Provident Fund Organisation Bhavishya Nidhi
Kozhikode District Co-operative Press Ltd
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
P.B.Suresh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
