M/S MAIYAS BEVERAGES AND FOODS PVT LTD v. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER AND RECOVERY OFFICER
WA/1866/2025 · 2025-11-26
D K Singh, Tara Vitasta Ganju
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 67074 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 67074 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48901-DB WA No. 1866 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT APPEAL NO. 1866 OF 2025 (L-PF) BETWEEN:
M/S MAIYAS BEVERAGES AND FOODS PVT LTD REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT.
NO 53, 7TH B MAIN, 30TH CROSS, 4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560011 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR NAVA MOHAN KUMAR …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER AND RECOVERY OFFICER EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, BHAVISHYA NIDHI BAVAN, ANNAPOORNESHWARI COMPLEX, S.NO 37/1, 6TH MAIN SINGASANDRA BENGALURU -560068. …RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 17.11.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No. 24065/2025 (L-PF) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48901-DB WA No. 1866 of 2025
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The present writ appeal has been filed impugning the
judgment and order dated 17.11.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.24065/2025(L-PF) instituted by the petitioner against the order of attachment of movable property dated 22.07.2025 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, for recovery of the PF amount as determined under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act'),
2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking in the writ petition, for the sake of convenience.
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48901-DB WA No. 1866 of 2025
3. The learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order has held that the writ petition cannot be filed to challenge an order passed under Section 7A of the Act, inasmuch as there is a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 7-I of the Act, and therefore, the writ petition has been dismissed by the impugned judgment and order.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is a Company, under the orders of the NCLT it is facing winding up proceedings. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in Appeal Nos.596- 597/2019 against the order passed by the National Company Law Board, Bangalore Bench on 10.05.2018 whereby the application for winding up of the Company was admitted and the interim Resolution Professional was appointed, has reserved the order on 09.12.2024, and the
order has not yet been pronounced till date.
5. In the meantime, the prescribed authority has passed the order under Section 7A of the Act and in
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48901-DB WA No. 1866 of 2025
pursuance to that order, the immovable properties of the Company have been attached.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will file an appropriate application before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, where the
judgment is pending in the appeal filed by the petitioner. However, he submits that he may be given some time to approach the NCLAT. He also undertakes that in the meantime, the Company will not dispose off any of its assets (movable or immovable).
7. Once Resolution Professional is appointed by the NCLT in Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code proceedings, the Ex-management would not have any right to institute any proceedings on behalf of the Company.
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48901-DB WA No. 1866 of 2025
8. In view thereof, we do not find that writ petition was maintainable even otherwise. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal. If the appellant has any other remedy, he may take recourse to such remedy.
9. In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending interim applications, if any, stand dismissed.
(D K SINGH) JUDGE
(TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE
NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
Digitally signed by DINESH KUMAR SINGH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA