LAWS(BOM)-1988-1-47

HAROON AND COMPANY Vs. REG P F COMMI

Decided On January 21, 1988
HAROON AND COMPANY Appellant
V/S
REG.P.F.COMMI. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner No. I-M/s. Haroon & Company is a partnership firm carrying on business, inter alia, as Commission Agents in fresh fish and other marine products having their office at 9, Saboo Sidik Road, off Palton Road, Bombay-400 001. It consists of five partners. Petitioner No. 2-Haroon Sea Food Private Limited is a Company incorporated on 9th May, 1979 under the Companies Act, 1956. They carry on business as processors and export meat and marine products and processed Food products, having their registered office at Central Ice and Cold Storage Building, 9, Saboo Sidik Road, off Palton Road, Bombay-400001.

(2.) It is the case of petitioners No. 1 and 2 that petitioner No. 1 is an establishment within the meaning and under the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), and the provisions of the said Act are applicable to them and a Code Number bearing No. MH/14039 has been given to it by respondent No. 1, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner for Manarashtra and Goa, having his office at Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan, 341, Bandra (East), Bombay-400 051. Petitioner No. 1 has been paying contributions under the provisions or the Act and has been filing returns as required under the said Act in respect of the employees employed by them. It is their "further case that petitioner No. 2 are a separate legal entity and they had commenced their business sometime in September, 1979. Their business is independent of the business carried on by petitioner No. 1. Their workers have nothing to do with establishment of petitioner No. 1. It is also their case that the premises of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are different. Thus, according to both the petitioners, there is nothing in common between them and the two units have no functional integrality for any purpose whatsoever except that some of the partners of petitioner No. 1 were the subscribers of the Memorandum of Association of petitioner No. 2 and that some of the partners of petitioner No. 1 are the Directors of petitioner No. 2. In the submission of petitioners Nos. 1 and 2, therefore, they cannot be termed or clubbed as sister concerns.

(3.) The petitioners further contended that petitioner No. 2 having been incorporated on 9th May, 1979, the provisions of the Act became applicable to them only after 31st May, 1982 because they are entitled to exemption during the infancy period of three years. However, respondent No. 1 issued a notice to petitioner No. 2 on 19th March, 1981, stating that petitioner No. 2 was a sister concern of petitioner No. 1 and Petitioner No. 1 was already covered under the provisions of the Act but, for the sake of convenience, a separate Code Number MH/20184 was allotted to the establishment of petitioner No. 2 with effect from 9th May, 1979. It was further stated in the said notice that for all purposes, under the Act, the establishment of petitioner No. 2 would be treated as one along with petitioner No. 2's so-called main establishment. On 26th March, 1981, petitioner No. 2 addressed a letter to the first respondent contending that they were not the sister concern of petitioner No. 1 and asked for a copy of the investigation report of the Inspector on which the first respondent had acted and also requested for a personal hearing. Accordingly, a personal hearing was granted to petitioner No. 2 when various documents and relevant papers were produced before the first respondent who, after taking into consideration all the documents, passed on order on 30th October, 1981 that the establishment of petitioner No. 2 was a separate legal entity and, therefore, they could not be clubbed together with Petitioner No. 1. It was further stated in the said order that the establishment of petitioner No. 2 would come under the purview of the Act only after the completion of three years infancy period. By the said order, the Code Number MH/20184 allotted to petitioner No. 2, pursuant to the order dated 19th March, 1981 was also cancelled.