High CourtsDivision Bench(2013) 08 KAR CK 0128

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II vs Ms. VXL Instruments Limited

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 5 August 2013

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ravi Malimath, J · K.L. Manjunath, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Appeal No. 8462 of 2012 (L-PF)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 319 words

K.L. Manjunath, J.—The legality and correctness of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 6522/2011 is called in question in this appeal. The appellant, vide Annexure-G, called upon the respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 21,38,938/- as damages. The same was questioned by the respondent by filing the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal. Challenging the same, Writ Petition came to be filed.

2.

The learned Single Judge relying on the judgment of the Apex Court reported in Organo Chemical Industries and Another Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, in the matter of Oregano Chemical Industries and Another VS. Union of India and Others came to the conclusion that the appellant herein has got power to reduce the damages in accordance with law. Accordingly, allowed the Writ Petition and set aside the order passed by the Original Authority and so also the Appellate Tribunal and remitted the matter to the appellant herein to consider the grievance of the respondent herein in accordance with law. Challenging the same, the present appeal is filed. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, we are of the opinion that no error is committed by the learned Single Judge in allowing the writ petition and remanding the matter to the appellant for the following reasons:

When the respondent has approached the Writ Court saying that he is entitled to reduction of damages, relying on the judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court, the learned Single Judge has remitted the matter to the appellant herein to consider the grievance of the respondent in accordance with law. This Court cannot find fault with the same. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The appellant is directed to reconsider the request of the respondent in accordance with law.

In view of dismissal of the appeal itself, I.A. No. 1/13 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is rejected.