COIMBATORE DISTRICT PODU THOZILLAR SAMGAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY versus BALA SUBRAMANIA FOUNDARY AND ORS.

COIMBATORE DISTRICT PODU THOZILLAR SAMGAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY versus BALA SUBRAMANIA FOUNDARY AND ORS.

No legal proposition in the award or annexed documents was erroneous. Alleged errors are mistakes of fact if at all; grievances do not amount to error apparent on the face of the record. Sufficient provisions have been made for workers' liabilities and contingencies, including gratuity. The objection to the award cannot be sustained; award made rule of the court with interest on judgment at 9%.

Parties
Petitioner: Coimbatore District Podu Thozillar Samgam represented by its Secretary; Respondent: Bal. A Subramania Foundry; Petitioner: A. Rangaswamy; Respondent: Coimbatore District Engineering and General Workers Union; Respondent: Velmurugan Factory
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 August 1987
Procedural Posture
Civil Miscellaneous Petitions; Writ Petitions; Special Leave Petitions / Final Judgment / Award Made Rule of Court
Outcome
Objections dismissed; Award made rule of the Court; Judgment in terms of the award; Petitions disposed of; No interim interest; Interest on judgment at 9%; No order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Award of Arbitrator, Gratuity Claims, Legal Misconduct Allegations
Arbitration Labour Law Award of Arbitrator Gratuity Claims Legal Misconduct Allegations

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Coimbatore District Podu Thozillar Samgam represented by its Secretary

Petitioner

Bal. A Subramania Foundry

Respondent

A. Rangaswamy

Petitioner

Coimbatore District Engineering and General Workers Union

Respondent

Velmurugan Factory

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Miscellaneous Petitions; Writ Petitions; Special Leave Petitions / Final Judgment / Award Made Rule of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the award was erroneous or suffered from legal misconduct
  2. 2 Whether the workers' gratuity claims were sufficiently protected

Ratio Decidendi

No legal proposition in the award or annexed documents was erroneous. Alleged errors are mistakes of fact if at all; grievances do not amount to error apparent on the face of the record. Sufficient provisions have been made for workers' liabilities and contingencies, including gratuity. The objection to the award cannot be sustained; award made rule of the court with interest on judgment at 9%.

Court Disposition

Objections dismissed; Award made rule of the Court; Judgment in terms of the award; Petitions disposed of; No interim interest; Interest on judgment at 9%; No order as to costs.

Orders

  • Award of Arbitrator made rule of the Court.
  • Judgment in terms of the award.