Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 236 (KER)

Varghese K. D. v. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

2020-02-25

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.

body2020
JUDGMENT : Raja Vijayaraghavan V., J. 1. The petitioner is the proprietor of M/s. J & S Apparels, Nedumkunnam in Kottayam District, a unit engaged in the manufacture of readymade clothes. Proceedings under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 was initiated against the petitioner for belated remittances of dues and by Exhibit-P1 assessment order, a sum of Rs. 1,26,805 was assessed. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not challenging the quantum of damages assessed. All that he requires is a breathing time to deposit the arrears. He contends that the lapses occurred due to reasons beyond his control and submits that the same is not willful. He further contend that the petitioner is facing severe financial crisis and prays for leniency. 3. Serious objection is raised by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent. 4. I have considered the submissions advanced. It appears that the petitioner has already remitted the interest under Section 7Q of the Act. Considering the facts and circumstances and the alleged impecunious circumstances pleaded by the petitioner herein, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner can be permitted to clear the dues to the respondent in installments. 5. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of on the following terms: "(i) The respondent shall grant ten equal monthly installments to the petitioner to clear the amounts assessed under Ext. P1. The first installment shall be payable on 15.3.2020 and the balance installments shall be paid on or before the 10th of every succeeding months, (ii) The recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance if the petitioner continues to pay the amounts as ordered by this Court without any default, (iii) On the petitioner committing default of payment of any two installments, the respondent may recommence the recovery proceedings. This order is passed without prejudice to the right of the respondent to realise amounts on any other heads, (iv) It is made clear that this order is made on the submission of the learned counsel that the petitioner is facing grave financial hardship and therefore, no further extension will be granted.