Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: kfc in Employees Provident Fund Organisation vs The Deputy Collector (Rr) on 6 December, 2010Matching Fragments
Issues raised in these writ petitions are connected and therefore, these cases were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.
2. M/s. Star Refineries Private Limited, was alloted 2 acres of land in Sy.No.67/2 Part and 89/1A of Kadungalloor Village situated in Edayar Industrial Estate for industrial purposes (hereinafter referred to as Company for short). The company availed of financial assistance from Kerala Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as KFC for short) mortgaging the property. The Company was an establishment to which the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 was applicable and was under the coverage of the said Act w.e.f. 31/8/95. According to the Employees Provident Fund Organisation, the Company defaulted payment of statutory contributions for the period from September, 1995. Thereafter enquiry as contemplated under Section 7A of the EPF Act was conducted & 21344/10 and order dated 13/3/2000 was passed determining that an amount of Rs.3,27,743.25 was due from the Company. Despite demands of the EPF Department, company did not remit the amount and finally by order dated 20/12/01 issued under Section 8 of the EPF Act, the aforesaid properties were attached by the EPF Department.
3. While the attachment was thus remaining in force, the KFC initiated proceedings under the State Financial Corporations Act for realisation of its dues. Finally, in the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act, the property was auctioned. In the auction thus held, M/s.Meron Bio Products Pvt. Ltd, being the highest bidder, the petitioner in WP(C) No.21344/10 purchased the property, for a total amount of Rs.29,50,000/-. Accordingly, sale was confirmed in their favour by order dated 10/11/2003. Pursuant to the confirmation of sale, sale certificate dated 17/3/05 was executed under Section 56 of the Revenue Recovery Act and the same was registered in the office of the Sub Registrar of Alangad in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
5. It is stated that in pursuance to the directions in the judgment, the statutory authorities other than Assistant Provident & 21344/10 Fund Commissioner, filed claim petitions before the Land Revenue Commissioner, who passed order dated 29/11/06 directing that the claimants will sent their claims to the KFC and that the KFC will identify other properties of the defaulters and follow up for recovery proceedings.
6. Meanwhile M/s.Meron Bio Products Pvt. Ltd made an application for encumbrance certificate in respect of the property and they were issued encumbrance certificate dated 14/5/2010, which is produced as Ext.P5 in WP(C) No.21344/10. The encumbrance certificate showed that there are five encumbrances on the property of which two related to attachments in two suits filed by individuals and two related to sales tax and PF arrears of the previous owner and the fifth one related to the purchase by M/s.Meron Bio Products in public auction. M/s.Meron Bio Products Pvt Ltd. filed representation for deleting the aforesaid encumbrances and finally Sub Registrar issued letter dated 14/6/2010, Ext.P7 in WP(C) NO.21344/10 informing that the encumbrances could be deleted only if there is an order from a court of law. It is in these circumstances, M/s.Meron Bio Products Pvt. Ltd has filed WP(C) No.21344/10 & 21344/10 praying to quash Ext.P1 referred to above and for a declaration that the property purchased by them is free from all encumbrances in view of Section 60 of the Revenue Recovery Act and to direct the respondents to delete all encumbrances prior to 10/11/2003 when they purchased the property.
14. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid statutory provision and the judgment of this Court, which was relied on by the Apex Court in Central Bank of India v. State of Kerala and others [(2009) 4 SCC 94], not only that the PF dues are a charge on the property but also the priority of claim of the PF Department over the dues to KFC has to be upheld and I do so. Therefore, KFC should pay the amount due to the PF department from out of the sale proceeds.
15. In the result, WP(C) No.21344/2010 is liable to be dismissed and I do so.