HIGH COURT OF KERALA
AMIT RAWAL, J
M/S. SATHYADHARA COMMUNICATIONS (P) LTD. – Appellant
Versus
THE CENTRAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES, EPFO – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Order Ext.P2 dated 16.3.2021 dismissing the appeal on account of limitation preferred under Section 7(i) of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act has been assailed.
2. The order of assessment Ext.P1 dated 11.10.2019 passed under Section 14B of the 1952 Act with regard to the damages of Rs.60000/- and odd amount was not complied with necessitating the petitioner to file an appeal. The appeal aforementioned was filed on 19.1.2021 whereas the limitation as per Rule 7 of the EPF Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 1997 is 60 days and another 60 days; total 120 days. 120 days expired on 10.2.2020. However the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court for entertaining the appeal without raising the objection of limitation was passed on 15.3.2020. Thus according to the petitioner, there is delay of 34 days whereas the Appeal has been filed on 19.1.2021, almost 10 months thereafter.
3. Counsel for the first respondent Dr.Abraham P.Meachinkara has also raised the objection qua maintainability of the appeal as it was beyond the period of limitation.
I am afraid the aforementioned argument cannot be accepted as the Rule 7 would reveal that the limitation cannot be condo
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.