M/S. MULLER & PHIPPS (INDJA) LTD. versus K. C. SUD
The gratuity that could be claimed under the present award by retrenched workmen was intended to be in addition to the retrenchment compensation and not in lieu thereof; therefore, respondent is entitled to gratuity even though he received retrenchment compensation.
- Parties
- Appellant: M/S. Muller & Phipps (India) Ltd.; Respondent: K. C. Sud
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 11 April 1960
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Decision of the Labour Court, Delhi, Dated May 18, 1959, in L.c.a. No. 53/1959
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- Gratuity Scheme, Retrenchment Compensation, Construction of Award, Section 25 F Industrial Disputes Act
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
M/S. Muller & Phipps (India) Ltd.
Appellant
K. C. Sud
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Decision of the Labour Court, Delhi, Dated May 18, 1959, in L.c.a. No. 53/1959
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether retrenched workmen can claim the benefit of a gratuity scheme in addition to retrenchment compensation under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act
- 2 Whether the terms of the gratuity scheme provide for double benefit
Ratio Decidendi
The gratuity that could be claimed under the present award by retrenched workmen was intended to be in addition to the retrenchment compensation and not in lieu thereof; therefore, respondent is entitled to gratuity even though he received retrenchment compensation.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- Respondent K. C. Sud is entitled to payment of Rs. 80.42 np. as gratuity under the award in addition to retrenchment compensation already received.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment