LAWS(BOM)-2017-1-169

CENTRAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, HAVING OFFICE AT BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAWAN, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI Vs. M/S GOLDLINE PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD., PLOT NO. 103, 1ST FLOOR, LEELA APARTMENT, SHILPA HOUSING SOCIETY, NEAR SHANIDHAM MANDIR, SAPTAGIRI NAGAR, BESIDE MANISH NAGAR ROAD, NAGPUR

Decided On January 23, 2017
Central Board Of Trustees, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Having Office At Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi Appellant
V/S
M/S Goldline Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 103, 1St Floor, Leela Apartment, Shilpa Housing Society, Near Shanidham Mandir, Saptagiri Nagar, Beside Manish Nagar Road, Nagpur Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule Made Returnable Forthwith.

(2.) This Court by order dated 11.12015 issued notice to the respondent no.1, returnable on 03.02016. The notice was duly served on the respondent no.1. Thereafter, on 26.09.2016, 03.10.2016, 17.10.2016 and 25.11.2016, the matter was adjourned at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners. On 05.12016, this Court by referring that though, notice is issued to the respondent no.1 and it is duly served and none appeared for the respondent no.1, to grant one opportunity to the respondent no.1, posted the petition on 13.12016. The matter was then adjourned at the request of the petitioners on 23 occasions. Though, the matter was adjourned from time to time at the request of the petitioners, the respondent no.1 was absent on all the earlier dates and in spite of specific order dated 05.12016 observing that if none appears for the respondent no.1 on the next date i.e. on 13.12016 the petition would be heard and decided on its merits, today also none appears for the respondent. As the controversy involved in the present petition is already dealt with in the judgment of this Court, the petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

(3.) By the present writ petition, the petitioners challenge the order passed by the respondent no.2 Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, dated 26.11.2014, thereby partly allowing the appeal filed by the respondent no.1 and quashing and setting aside the order passed by the petitioner no.1 to the extent of damages.