Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 44 (KER)

J. J. Holidays Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

2020-01-14

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.

body2020
JUDGMENT : Raja Vijayaraghavan V., J. 1. The petitioner herein is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is running a resort at Munnar in the State of Kerala. The establishment owned by the petitioner is covered under the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. 2. According to the petitioner due to natural calamities including flood which beleaguered the State of Kerala in general and Munnar in particular their business went on a downward spiral and huge loss was sustained. The recession in the tourism industry did not help the cause of the petitioner either. The petitioner was therefore unable to make proper remittances of contributions with the respondent towards provident fund during the period from July 2016 to July 2018. According to the petitioner, a sum of Rs. 9,69,097 is due to the respondent and for realizing the same Exhibit P1 order has been issued under Section 8F(3)(i) of Act of 1952 directing the Branch Manager, ICICI Bank, Pala, where the petitioner is maintaining an account. The bank has been ordered to keep the account on hold and also to transfer the demanded amounts to the respondent. The petitioner contends that there was no wilful laches on their part and the non-payment was not deliberate. It is in the above backdrop that the petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the respondent to permit the petitioner to remit the amount demanded as per Exhibit P-1 in monthly installments. 3. Sri. Joy Thattil Ittoop, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent, very fairly concedes and states in view of the quantum of amount involved, the petitioner can be permitted to wipe off the entire arrears in eight equal monthly installments. 4. I have considered the submissions advanced. Considering the fact that the petitioner is running a hotel employing several workers and the alleged impecunious circumstances which is said to be plaguing the establishment, I am of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to clear the dues to the 1st respondent in installments. 5. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of on the following terms: (i) The petitioner shall produce the certified copy of this judgment before the respondent within two weeks from today. 5. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of on the following terms: (i) The petitioner shall produce the certified copy of this judgment before the respondent within two weeks from today. (ii) The respondent shall quantify the amounts due from the petitioner and inform the petitioner in writing, within a week therefrom, detailing the amount due along with interest as on 16.1.2020. (iii) The respondent shall grant eight equal monthly installments and the first installment shall be payable on 3.2.2020. (iv) The recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance if the petitioner continues to pay the amounts as ordered by this Court without any default. (v) On the petitioner committing default of payment of any two installments, the respondent may recommence the recovery proceedings. (vi) If any amount towards interest is due, the respondent shall inform the petitioner before the payment of the 8th installment is made and the petitioner will be bound to clear the same within a period of 30 days. It is made clear that the right, if any, of the respondent under Section 14B and 7-Q of Act 1952 will not be in any manner affected by the directions issued above.