Primary sources · Order

MOHIB SHOES P LTD. VS. THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

Supreme Court of India · 04 Aug 2026


Reproduced as issued. This is the text of the document as published by Supreme Court of India, ingested automatically and not edited, summarised or interpreted. Refer to the original document for the authoritative text.
Incomplete metadata. Some expected fields could not be read from the source. They are shown as missing rather than filled in:
  • Supreme Court adapter could not find a case number for diary number 24272026.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

INHERENT JURISDICTION

REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) OF 2026

Arising out of Diary No. 2427 of 2026

IN

SLP (C) NO.22729 OF 2025

MOHIB SHOES P LTD. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER & ORS.

R-1: The Central Provident Fund Commissioner,

Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry'

of Labour and Employment, Plat A Ground Floor,

Office Block-ll, East Kidwai Nagar,

New Delhi - 110 023.

R-2: The Additional Central Provident Fund

Commissioner, Chennai and Puducherry (Chennai)

O/o. the Additional Central Provident - Fund

Commissioner, Chennai and Puducherry

No.37, Royapettah High Road, 0pp. Swagat Hotel,

Chennai - 600 014.

R-3: The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner- II,

Regional Office, Vellore, S-1, TNHB, Phase III,

Sathuvachari, Vellore 7 632 009.

R-4: The Enforcement Officer

Division-4,

O/o. The Regional Office, Vellore, S-1, TNHB

Phase -III, Sathuvachari, Vellore - 632 009.

R-5 The Sub Registrar

O/o. The Sub Registrar, Ambur, Post Office Road,

11, Railway Station Road,

Ambur - 635 802, Tirupattur District.

Respondent(s)

O R D E R

As per the Office Report dated 01.06.2026, the Review Petition

is defective for the reasons mentioned therein.

2. Despite the Registry’s communication dated 03.02.2026

addressed to the learned counsel for the petitioner informing him

to cure the defects, the same has not been done.

3. Be that as it may, the instant petition has been filed by the

petitioner for review of order dated 13.10.2025 passed in SLP(C)

No.22729 of 2025.

4. Having carefully perused the petitions for review and the

papers connected therewith, we do not find any ground made out for

reconsideration of the order of which review is sought.

5. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed, both on the

ground of being defective as well as on merits.

6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

.......................J.

(AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH)

.......................J.

(NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH)

NEW DELHI

AUGUST 04, 2026.

ITEM NO.1001 SECTION XII

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 2427/2026

[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-10-2025

in SLP(C) No. No. 22729/2025 passed by the Supreme Court of India]

MOHIB SHOES P LTD. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER & ORS. Respondent(s)

IA No. 16928/2026 - ORAL HEARING

Date : 04-08-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH

By Circulation

O R D E R

Application for oral hearing is rejected.

2. Review petition stands dismissed in terms of the signed order

placed on the file.

3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(SACHIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) (ANJALI PANWAR)

COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Primary source: Supreme Court of IndiaView original document →

← All primary sources

MOHIB SHOES P LTD. VS. THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER | JurisIntel