Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Gujarat vs Regional on 28 March, 2011

Author: H.K.Rathod

Bench: H.K.Rathod

   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

MCA/287/2011	 6/ 6	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR DIRECTION No. 287 of 2011
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12338 of 2007
 

 
=========================================================

 

GUJARAT
METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD. - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

REGIONAL
PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
RD DAVE for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Opponent(s) : 1, 
MR
NIRAL R MEHTA for Opponent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 28/03/2011 

 

ORAL
ORDER 

Heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties.

In this application, prayer is made by applicant to direct registry of this Court to refund amount of Rs.1 lakh together with accrued interest, if any, thereon to applicant, forthwith.

This prayer is based on averments made in present application in Para 5 to 8 which are quoted as under :

"5. The applicant states that their appeal No.364(5) of 2007 filed before EPF Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi came to be dismissed by order dated 16.4.2010. Hence, the opponent issued notice dated 19.5.2010 to the applicant thereby demanded Rs.4,34,387=00 being an amount under same certificate for recovery and also demanded Rs.1,67,477=00 as interest under Sec.7Q of the Act aggregating to Rs.6,01,864=00. Said demand notice is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE-C to this application. The opponent issued another notice dated 1-7-2010 demanding cost of Rs.5,600=00 over and above amount so as to make it Rs.4,34,387=00 plus interest aggregating to Rs.6,09,077=00.
6. The applicant deposited said amount of Rs.4,34,387=00 and Rs.1,67,477=00 by two cheques on 6-7-2010 with opponent by covering letter dt.6-7-2010. Annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE-D is a copy of said letter dated 6-7-2010. Therefore, the opponent revoked their order of recovery issued under Sec.8F of the Act vide letter dated 6-7-2010. Annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE-E is a copy of said order dated 6-7-2010 revoking demand order.
7. The applicant also deposited Rs.8,028=00 with the opponent by challan with letter dated 6-8-2010 as per their demand. Annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE-F is a copy of said letter dated 6-8-2010 with challan of payment.
8. Thus, now nothing is due and payable to the opponent for the period in question which was in controversy and which was in dispute in main petition. The applicant has paid all dues regularly to the opponent. As on date nothing is due and payable to opponent by the applicant. Under the above facts and circumstances, the applicant is entitled to get back said amount of Rs.1,00,000=00 with interest deposited by the applicant with Registry of this Hon'ble Court pursuant to order at Annexure-A dated 8-5-2007 for that purpose this application is filed by the applicant."

Learned advocate Mr. N.R. Mehta received a written instructions from Assistant PF Commissioner, Baroda vide letter dated 11th March, 2011, where, following facts are narrated :

Recovery Certificate No.35 dated 4/04/2007 issued for Rs.4,34,387/- for damages for the period 3/2000 to 5/2003.
The establishment approached to Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat by filing SCA No.12338 of 2007.
Hon'ble High Court disposed of the petition vide order dated 8/05/2007 and directed the establishment to file appeal before EPF AT before 31st May, 2007 deposit Rs.1 lakh before the Registry of Hon'ble High Court.
Accordingly, the establishment intimated vide its letter dated 17/05/07 that they have deposited Rs.1 lakh on 10/05/07 before the Registry of Hon'ble High Court Notice for auction was published in the News Paper on 18/04/2007.
The establishment filed appeal No.364(5)2007 before the EPF AT Hon'ble EPF AT vide order dated 1/05/2007, stayed the operation of the 14B order.
Hon'ble EPF AT dismissed the appeal vide order dated 16/04/2010.
The Recovery officer issued notice No.83 dated 19/05/2010 to remit Rs.4,34,387/- (Certificate Amount) and Rs.1,67,477/- for interest u/s. 7Q and cost.
Further 8F order dated 1/07/2010 issued upon the Banker of the establishment for Rs.4,34,387/- Certificate Amount, Rs.1,69,090/- for interest u/s.7Q and Rs.5,600/- for cost.
The establishment remitted Rs.4,34,387/- (Certificate Amount) and Rs.1,67,477/- (Interest/Cost) on 10/07/2010.
Further the establishment vide letter dated 19/07/2010 asked to remit outstanding amount of Rs.8,028/- (Difference of Interest and Cost up to date of payment).
The establishment remitted Rs.8,028/- on 3/08/2010. Thus the establishment remitted entire amount in respect of Recovery Certificate and no amount due in respect of the said certificate.
Let learned advocate Mr. Mehta place on record xerox copy of letter of Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner dated 11th March, 2011.
In light of aforesaid averments made in letter dated 11th March, 2011, now, according to Assistant PF Commissioner, Baroda, the establishment remitted entire amount in respect of recovery certificate and no amount due in respect of said certificate. Therefore, applicant is entitled to receive amount by way of refund from this Court which was deposited by applicant in pursuant to order passed by this Court.
Therefore, it is directed to registry of this Court to refund amount of Rs.1 lakh together with accrued interest, if any, to applicant by account payee cheque in name of Gujarat Metal Cast Industries Limited, after proper verification, immediately, without any further delay.
It is also directed to registry that aforesaid cheque is to be handed over to learned advocate Mr. R.D. Dave who will accept it on behalf of applicant - company and also give receipt for that.
In view of above observations and directions, present application is disposed of.
[H.K. RATHOD, J.] #Dave     Top