https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796655 Service of an injunction application with the plaint was treated as substantial compliance with Order XXXIX Rule 3 where relevant annexures were included in the application and defendants could contest the matter. The notes state that the plaint prima facie disclosed a provident-fund deficit claim against an exempted establishment, and that the statutory provident-fund regime did not exclude civil jurisdiction over alleged defalcation. Non-joinder of all trustees and alleged suppression relating to later police proceedings did not defeat interim relief. Parallel civil recovery and criminal investigation could continue, and SFIO investigation was considered appropriate given the alleged connection to the establishment's affairs. The interim protection and investigation were continued pending adjudication. en-us Mon, 03 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Aug 2026 08:32:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796655 Service of an injunction application with the plaint was treated as substantial compliance with Order XXXIX Rule 3 where relevant annexures were included in the application and defendants could contest the matter. The notes state that the plaint prima facie disclosed a provident-fund deficit claim against an exempted establishment, and that the statutory provident-fund regime did not exclude civil jurisdiction over alleged defalcation. Non-joinder of all trustees and alleged suppression relating to later police proceedings did not defeat interim relief. Parallel civil recovery and criminal investigation could continue, and SFIO investigation was considered appropriate given the alleged connection to the establishment's affairs. The interim protection and investigation were continued pending adjudication. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 03 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796655