LexMESSRS. ISPAHANI LTD. CALCUTTA versus ISPAHANI EMPLOYEES UNION
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
1959 Great Indian Motor Works Ltd., and A ·not her v. Their E1nployees and Others Sinha]. 1959 Jt,[ay6. ''\. 24 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1960(1)] \ In our opinion, therefore, the Labour Appellate Tribunal was not in error in dismissing the appeal by -1111 the Company and by the auction-purchaser, as in- competent. It follows, therefore, that we are not con- cerned with the merits of the appeal. In view of the fact that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the controversy raised in the abortive appeal, this dismissal shall be without prejudice to the appel- lants' rights, if any. The appeal is, accordingly, dis- missed, but the parties here are directed to bear their own costs, in view of the fact that we have not gone into the merits of the controversy. Appeal clismi8ser.l. MESSRS. ISPAHANI LTD. CALCUTTA v. ISP AHANI EMPLOYEES' UNION (B. P. SINHA, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR and K. N. WANCHOO, JJ.) . Industrial Dispute-Puja Bonus-Implied agreement-Tes/- Benefits arising out of service with employer's predecessors-Worlmten if entitled to. The workmen were originally employed by M/s. M.M. Ispahani Ltd., which shortly before the partition of India transferred its registered office from CO:Icutta to Chittagong. The appellant company was incorporated on September 15, 1947 and took over the good-will and trading rights of M/s. M. M. Ispahani Ltd. and also purchased its stock-in-trade, properties and assets. Most of the shares of the appellant were held by M/s. M. M. Ispahani Ltd. and the business of the appellant was of the same nature carried on in the same premises with the san1e workmen on the same remuneration. On the transfer of M/s. M. M. Ispahani Ltd. to Chittagong the question arose of retrenching those workmen who were not willing to go to Chittagong and when the appellant company came into existence it agreed to employ those workmen. The workmen apparently agreed to the termination of their services with M/s. M. M. Ispahani Ltd., and after receiving their provident funds and arrears of salaries they were appointed by the appellant. M/s. M. M. Ispahani Ltd. used to pay puja bonus to the workmen at the rate of one month's wages and the appellant also paid the same from 1948 up to 1952, even in the years in which the appellant suffered losses. As the appellant did not pay puja bonus for 1953, a dispute arose and was referred for • • • ~ S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 25 • adjudication. The workmen also claimed benefits from the appellant for the period of service rendered by them under M/s. M. M. Ispahani Ltd. Held, that the workmen were entitled to the puja bonus equal to one month's wages as it was an implied term of the employment of the workmen. Puja was a special festival in Bengal and it had become usual with many firms there to give bonus before Puja to their workmen. A claim for puja bonus was based either on implied agreement or on customary payment. An implied agreement could be inferred if the following circumstances were established:- (i) that the payment was unbroken ; (ii) that the payment had been made for a sufficiently long period ; anci (iii) that it was not paid out of bounty. The payment need not necessarily be at a uniform rate throughout, and it was for the Tribunal to decide the quantum in a particular year taking into account the various payments made in previous years. '. In the present1case the payment was unbroken and was not made out of bounty as it was made even in years of loss. The sufficiency of the length of the period depended on the circum- stances of each case and in the present case the appellant had paid the bonus since its birth. Mahalaxmi Cotton Mills Ltd., Calcutta v. Mahalaxmi Cotton Mills Workers' Union, 1953 L.A.C. 370 approved. Held further, that the workmen were not entitled to any benefits arising out of their employment with M/s. M. M. Ispahani Ltd. The workmen had agreed :o the termination of their service with that company, and there was no express or implied under- taking given by the appellant regarding continuity of service when employing the workmen. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeals Nos. 473 & 474 of 1957. Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 27th July 1955 of the Labour Appel- late Tribunal of India at Calcutta in Appeal No. Cal. 257 of 1954. M. C. • Setalva<1, Attorney-General for India (M/s. J. B. Dadachanji, S. N. A
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.