Nepc Agro Fields Vs. Union of India

Nepc Agro Fields vs Union of India

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Aug 12, 1997

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/695068

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/695068
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Arun Kumar, J.
Decided On: Aug 12, 1997
Case Number: Civil Writ Petition No. 1583 of 1997 and Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2830 of 1997
Subject: Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Section 7-A & 8--Demand of dues--Compliance of provision--Necessity of--Undertaking given by Department thai no demand shall be made except in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Act and the order stopping the Bank Account...

Key legal issue: Civil
Acts & sections: Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952 - Sections 7A

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nepc Agro Fields

Advocate Sandeep Bhalla, ; Sudha Srivastava and ; Atul Nanda, Ad

Respondent

Union of India

Legal References

Acts: Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952 - Sections 7A
Reported In: 1998(46)DRJ177

Excerpt

employees provident fund & miscellaneous provisions act, 1952 section 7-a & 8--demand of dues--compliance of provision--necessity of--undertaking given by department thai no demand shall be made except in accordance with the procedure laid down in the act and the order stopping the bank account of employer had been withdrawn--petition challenging the action of department disposed off accordingly. - arun kumar, j.(1) the learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4 submits that the respondents will make the assessment in accordance with the provisions of the employees provident fund and miscellaneous provisions act, 1952. it is further submitted that till the procedure prescribed under the statute is followed, no demand against the petitioner will be enforced. it has been further pointed out that the order by which the operation of the bank account of the petitioner has been stopped has already been withdrawn. in view of this statement on behalf of the respondents, this petition does not survive. the same stands disposed of. (2) the petitioner will co-operate with the respondents in any inquiry which the respondents may hold. (3) copies of this order be supplied to counsel for the parties dasti.

Full Judgment

Arun Kumar, J.

(1) The learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4 submits that the respondents will make the assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. It is further submitted that till the procedure prescribed under the Statute is followed, no demand against the petitioner will be enforced. It has been further pointed out that the order by which the operation of the bank account of the petitioner has been stopped has already been withdrawn. In view of this statement on behalf of the respondents, this petition does not survive. The same stands disposed of.

(2) The petitioner will co-operate with the respondents in any inquiry which the respondents may hold.

(3) Copies of this order be supplied to counsel for the parties dasti.

Same Court & Year Delhi · 1997 Same Parties Nepc Agro Fields vs Union of India Same Subject Civil Same Judge Arun Kumar, J. Acts & Sections Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 195...

Civil