INDIAN BANK versus K. USHA AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

INDIAN BANK versus K. USHA AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

Transferee bank is bound to contractual obligations under settlement made by transferor bank with its employees, including compassionate appointments, unless an express provision in the amalgamation scheme or statute overrides such obligations. In absence of any such express contrary provision, the settlement remains operative against transferee bank post-amalgamation. Where the bank did not contest vacancy existence, High Court's mandamus for appointment was proper.

Parties
Appellant: Indian Bank; Respondents: K. Usha and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 January 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Amalgamation of Banks, Compassionate Appointment, Binding Nature of Settlements, Successor Liability
Banking Law Labour and Employment Law Service Law Amalgamation of Banks Compassionate Appointment Binding Nature of Settlements Successor Liability

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Indian Bank

Appellant

K. Usha and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether dependents of deceased employees of transferor bank are entitled to compassionate appointments after amalgamation with transferee bank
  2. 2 Whether a settlement under Section 2(p) of Industrial Disputes Act binding transferor bank also binds transferee bank post-amalgamation
  3. 3 Whether Clause 10 of Scheme of Amalgamation and Section 45(14) of Banking Regulation Act override the settlement

Ratio Decidendi

Transferee bank is bound to contractual obligations under settlement made by transferor bank with its employees, including compassionate appointments, unless an express provision in the amalgamation scheme or statute overrides such obligations. In absence of any such express contrary provision, the settlement remains operative against transferee bank post-amalgamation. Where the bank did not contest vacancy existence, High Court's mandamus for appointment was proper.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appellant bank directed to grant compassionate appointments to respondents as per High Court order