LexKHANDESH SPG. & WVG. MILLS CO. LTD. versus THE RASHTRIYA GIRNI KAMGAR SANGH,
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
- - , S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 841 KHANDESH SPG. & WVG. MILLS CO. LTD. v. THE RASHTRIYA GIRNI KAMGAR SANGH, JALGAON (P. B. GAJEND_RAGADIUR, K. SuBBA RAo, AND K. c. DAS GUPTA; JJ.) Industrial Dispute-Bonus-Fu.ll Bench Formula-Rehabilita- tion-Reserves used as working capital-Mode of Proof. In ascertaining the surplus available for the payment of bonus according to the Full Bench formula the Industrial Court allowed the statutory depreciation but did not give any credit for the rehabilitation amount claimed. The Industrial Court estimated the amount required for rehabilitation at Rs. 60 lakhs; out of this amount it deducted Rs. 51 lakhs representing the reserves and the balance of Rs. 9 lakhs spread over a period of 15 years gave the figure of Rs. 60,000 as the amount that should be set apart for the year in question for rehabilitation. This amount being less than the statutory depreciation the Industrial Court held that the appellant was not entitled to any deduction on account of rehabilitation as a prior charge. The appellant con- tended that the balance-sheet disclosed that the entire reserves had been used as working capital and consequently the said reserves should not be excluded from the amount claimed towards rehabilitation. Held, that the appellant had failed to prove that the reserves had in fact been used as working capital and as such the amount was i;ightly deduct11d by the Industrial Court from the amount fixed for rehabilitation. The Associated Cement Companies Ltd. v. Its Workmen. "[1959] S.C.R. 925, referred to. In view of the importance of the item of rehabilitation in the calculation of the available surplus it was necessary for tribunals to weigh with great care the evidence of both parties to ascertain every sub-item that went into or was subtracted from the item of rehabilitation. If parties agreed, agreed figures could be accepted. If they agreed to a decision on affidavits, that course could be adopted. But in the absence of agreement the procedure prescribed by 0. XIX, Code of Civil Procedure had to be followed. The accounts, the balance~sheet and profit and loss accounts were prepared by the management and the labour had no hand in it. When so much depended on this item it was necessary that the Industrial Court insisted upon a clear proof of the item of rehabi- litation and also gave a real and adequate opportunity to labour to canvass the correctness of the particulars furnished by the employers. Indian Hume Pipe Company, Ltd. v. Their Workmen. [r960] 2 S.C,R. 32, Tata Oil Mills Company Ltd. v. Its Workmen. [r960] I S.C.R I. and Anil Starch Products Ltd. v. Ahmedabad Chemical Workers' Union. C.A. No. 684 of 1957 (not reported), referred to. z960 January 22. 842 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1960(2)] r96o CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. Khand'5h SPG & 257 of 1958. wvG. Mill; Appeal by special leave from the Award dated co. Ltd. August 20, 1957, of the Industrial Court, Bombay, in v. Reference (IC) No. 197 of 1956. TheRoshtriyaGirni O. K. Daphtary Solicitor - General of India. Kainf:Z~a~;,ngh, S. N. Andley, J.B. Dadachanji and Rameshwar Nath, · for the appellant. Subba Rao]. B. P. Maheshwari, for the respondent. I. N. Shroff, for Interveners Nos. 1 and 2. The Intervener No. 3 did not appear. •' 1960 January 22, The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SuBBA RAO J.-This appeal raises the quest.ion as to what extent the reserves can be deducted from the amount required for rehabilitation of plant and machinery and also as to the manner by which the deductible reserves can be ascertained. It would be enough if we narrated only the facts relevant to the question raised. The appellant., Khandesh Spinning and Weaving Mills Company Limited, is a textile mill and its factory is situate at Jalgaon. The respondent, Rashtriya Girni Kamgar Sangh, represents the employees of the appellant-Company. The responde11t on behalf, of the employees issued a notice to the appellant under s. 42(2) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, demanding payment of reason- able bonus for the period from January 1, 1955 to December 31, 19()5. Negotiations in this regard having failed, the respondent made a reference to the Industrial Court under s. 73A of the said Act for arbitration of the dispute arising out of the said notice. The arbitrato_r, i.e. the Industrial Court, following the "Full Bench Formula",
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.