ARJUN NAIK AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Civil), 2591 of 2006, Judgment Date: Jan 21, 2016

                                                              NON-REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2591 OF 2006


THE KELVIN JUTE CO.LTD.WORS.P.F.& ORS.                          Appellant(s)



                                VERSUS

KRISHNA KUMAR AGARWALA & ORS.                                  Respondent(s)

                                    WITH

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2593 OF 2006


                               J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.
1.    After having extensively  heard  Mr.  Dushyant  Dave  and  Mr.  Jayant
Bhushan, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr.  Sudhir
Chandra, Mr. Bhaskar P. Gupta and Mr.  Krishnan  Venugopal,  learned  senior
counsel appearing for the respondents, we see no ground  to  interfere  with
the well reasoned order passed by the learned Single Judge of  the  Calcutta
High Court, as affirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court,  since  the
High Court has mainly proceeded on undisputed facts.
2.    Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, learned senior  counsel,  has  submitted  that
the Kelvin Jute Company Ltd. has since merged into  Trend  Vyapaar  Ltd.  in
2001 under a scheme formed by BIFR.  We  see  from  the  Judgment  that  the
direction for payment of the provident fund dues is to the Trust as well  as
to the Company.
3.    In the unlikely event of the Trust not able to  meet  the  payment  as
directed by the High Court, it would be open to the new company referred  to
above to approach this Court for appropriate directions.
4.    Since the matter has been pending before this Court since 2006 and  as
there was an order of stay of the Judgment  of  the  High  Court,  we  grant
further period of three months for payment of the amount as directed by  the
High Court.
5.    In view of the above, the Civil Appeals are dismissed  with  no  order
as to costs.

                                                   .......................J.
                                                           [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]


                                                   .......................J.
                                                   [ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]

      New Delhi;
      January 21, 2016.