26 September 2016
Supreme Court
Download

THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, NEW DELHI Vs LALA J.R. EDUCATION SOCIETY .

Bench: KURIAN JOSEPH,ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
Case number: C.A. No.-009840-009840 / 2016
Diary number: 26576 / 2016
Advocates: RAMESHWAR PRASAD GOYAL Vs


1

Page 1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9840 OF 2016 Arising out of SLP (C) No.28796  of 2016  (Arising out  of CC No. 17728 of 2016)  

   THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, NEW DELHI AND ORS.  APPELLANTS

                               VERSUS LALA J.R. EDUCATION SOCIETY AND ORS.          RESPONDENTS

 J U D G M E N T KURIAN,J.

1 Delay condoned.

2 Leave granted.

3 Appellants  are  aggrieved  since  the  application filed under Order VII, Rule 11, CPC has been rejected.

4 According to the appellants, the respondents having exhausted all the remedies under the Employees Provident Funds  and  Miscellaneous  Provisions  Act,  1952,  cannot thereafter approach the Civil Court, which is barred under Section  7L(4)  of  the  Employees  Provident  Funds  and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

5 On an application filed under Order VII, Rule 11, CPC, the Civil Court can only see the pleadings in the plaint and not anything else including written statement.  

2

Page 2

- 2 -

6. The  main  grievance  urged  in  the  plaint  is  that  the procedure under the Act has not been followed and, therefore, the appellants are entitled to file  a suit.  If that be so, the plaintiff is entitled to file a suit, as held by this Court in the case of  Dhulabhai and Others Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr. reported in (1968) 3 SCR 662.

7. According  to  the  appellants,  the  respondents  have suppressed crucial facts in the plaint, which if seen, the suit is only to be dismissed at the threshold.  Rejection of a plaint on institutional grounds is different from dismissal of a suit at pre-trial stage on the ground of maintainability. For dismissal on a preliminary issue, the Court is entitled and liable to look into the entire documents including those furnished by the defendant.

8. In  view  of  the  above  observations,  the  appeal  is dismissed.

9. However,  we  permit  the  appellants  to  raise  a preliminary issue on the maintainability of the suit, in which case, before proceeding with the trial, the trial court shall deal with the same in accordance with law.

No costs. .................J.

[KURIAN JOSEPH]    

     ....................J.

        [ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN] NEW DELHI; SEPTEMBER 26, 2016