SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 27212

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
GOPINATH P., J
MATHRUKA PRACHARANALAYAM LTD. – Appellant
Versus
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR
For the Respondents: SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN, SRI.S.PRASANTH, SC, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, SRI.V.K.SUNIL, GP

JUDGMENT This writ petition was filed in the year 2014 challenging Ext.P4 order of the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’). It is the case of the petitioner that the Tribunal reduced the damages imposed on the petitioner under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1952 Act”) only by 50%. According to the petitioner, when the Tribunal found that the petitioner was not a wilful defaulter, the Tribunal ought to have completely waived damages under of the 1952 Act. It is now settled law that mens rea is no longer a requirement for imposing damages under Section 14 B of the 1952 Act and therefore, the fact that the petitioner is not a wilful defaulter may not absolve the petitioner of liability to pay damages under of the 1952 Act. The Tribunal has, on a consideration of the facts, reduced the damages by 50%, I do not find that the exercise of discretion by the Tribunal is vitiated in any manner.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top