SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH
Hanuman Sugar & Industries – Appellant
Versus
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Patna, Bihar – Respondent
The petitioner no.1 is a Company within the Meaning of Indian Companies Act, 1956 and owns Sugar Factory. Petitioner no.3, the Eastern Sugar & Industries Ltd. Unit is a lessee of petitioner no.1.
2. Petitioner no.2 is the share holder as well as Chairman of both petitioner nos. 1 and 3.
3. (a). The petitioners seek direction to respondent nos. 1 and 2 not to fasten the liability of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act against petitioner no.2, the Chairman of the petitioner nos.1 and3, as well as for quashing of Warrant of Arrest issued under Section 8 B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as “E.P.F. Act, 1952”). Prayer has also been made for fixation of easy instalments for clearing Provident Fund dues.
(b) They further seek directions to the respondents to register the sale deeds as contained in Annexure-7 and 7/A and also to quash the order dated 18.02.2013 contained in Memo no.741 dated 19.02.2013 passed by District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari (Annexure-15), by which he has declined to approve permission for registration of sale deeds contained in Annexure-7 and 7/A.
4. In course
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.