Partly allowed

Goldview Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Regional Privident Fund Commissioner

Kerala HC1 Nov 2021WP(C)/21497/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an attaching order passed by the Assistant Regional Provident Fund Commissioner without hearing the petitioner. The Court directed the officer to obtain a valuation report, hear the petitioner, and pass fresh orders on the request to restrict recovery to specific properties within two months.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the impugned order; direct the 1st respondent to obtain a valuation report, hear the petitioner, and pass fresh orders on the representation within two months.

Goldview Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Regional… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 21497 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

M/S.GOLDVIEW VYAPAR PVT LTD. PEERMEDU, IDUKKI - 685531, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, MR. BINOD J KULAKKATIL.

¶8

BY ADVS. V.B.HARI NARAYANAN SALIHA BEEVI P.A

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 ASSISTANT REGIONAL PRIVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

¶11

2 RECOVERY OFFICER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

¶12

BY ADV JOY THATTIL ITTOOP,SC

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C) NO. 21497 OF 2021 ..2..

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner is an establishment engaged in plantation business. Due to default in payment of contribution under the EPF & MP Act, 1952, the respondents attached the entire extent of 4215 acres of tea plantation of the petitioner at Peermade. According to the petitioner, if his property is properly valued, it would fetch an amount of Rs.250 crores. If the extent of 600 acres of Glenmary estate is valued, that alone would fetch Rs.29 crores as per fair value, which would be more than sufficient to wipe out the entire liability to the tune of Rs.6.5crores as per Ext.P3. The petitioner filed Ext.P8 representation before the 1^st respondent, requesting him to restrict the recovery process to Glenmary estate alone, which has a market value of 10 crores, which is sufficient to recover the entire liability.

¶17

The petitioner has also approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.24003/2020 for a direction to the 1^st

¶18

WP(C) NO. 21497 OF 2021 ..3..

¶19

respondent to consider Ext.P8 request and to release the rest of the property from attachment. This Court by judgment dated 07.12.2020 directed the 1^st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P8 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Pursuant to Ext.P9 judgment, the 1^st respondent passed Ext.P10 order, wherein, the 1^st respondent has stated that only after obtaining a valuation report of the property, further action, such as auction/withdrawal of the property can be made. It is further stated that the matter has been referred to the valuer as per communication referred to therein. As per Ext.P10, a valuation report is awaited.

¶20

I have heard Sri.V.B.Harinarayan, the learned

¶21

Counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Joy Thattil Ittoop, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶22

On going through Ext.P10, I am of the opinion that the 1^st respondent/competent officer ought to have

¶23

WP(C) NO. 21497 OF 2021 ..4..

¶24

disposed of Ext.P8 representation, only after calling for valuation report and after considering the same. Ext.P10 is a non-speaking order. The request of the petitioner is not considered with due application of mind. I set aside Ext.P10 and direct the 1^st respondent/competent officer to pass fresh orders on Ext.P8, after obtaining the valuation report and after hearing the petitioner. The request of the petitioner for release of the property as requested in Ext.P8 shall be considered in the light of the valuation report and in accordance with law, which shall be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. I make it clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of Ext.P8 representation.

¶25

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶26

Sd/MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶27

SB/01/11/2021

¶28

WP(C) NO. 21497 OF 2021 ..5..

¶29

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21497/2021

¶30

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶31

Exhibit P1 A COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT SHOWING PROFIT / LOSS.

¶32

Exhibit P2 A COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 13.03.20 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶33

Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE TABULATION SHOWING THE AMOUNT PAYABLE BY EACH DIVISION AND TOAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY.

¶34

Exhibit P4 A COPY ATTACHMENT ORDER DATED 23.06.2004 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶35

Exhibit P5 A COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 14.08.2009 IN WA 1197/2009.

¶36

Exhibit P6 A COPY OF ATTACHMENT ORDER DATED 18.12.2012 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶37

Exhibit P7 A COPY OF STATEMENT SHOWING GOVERNMENT FAIR VALUE OF THE PROPERTY.

¶38

Exhibit P8 A COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 14.09.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶39

Exhibit P9 A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.12.2020 IN WP(C) 24003/2020. Exhibit P10 A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.02.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Goldview Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Regional Privident Fund Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Goldview Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Regional Privident 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

K.Ramachandran Vs Director General

Fathima Vs Ajithkumar

Kareem N.M. Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala Kalamandalam Deemed to Be University of Art and Culture Vs Gopikrishnan R.

Fadhil Rahman, Vs Cochin University of Science and Technology

R.Madhu, Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation