SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
5th May, 1959
S.R. DAS, C.J.I. N.H. BHAGWATI, S.K. DAS, P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR AND K.N. WANCHOO, JJ.
Crompton Parkinson (Works) Private Ltd., Bombay, Appellant
Versus
Its Workmen and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 756 and 757 of 1957.
Advocates appeared
Mr. C. K. Daphtary, Solicitor-General of India, (M/s. N. A, Palkhivala, Advocate, M/s. J. B. Dadachanji and S. N. Andley, Advocates of M/s. Rajinder Narain and Co, with him), for Appellant; M/s. Rajani Patel and Janardan Sharma, Advocates, for the Respondents.
Judgement
DAS CJI.: These are appeals by special leave filed by Crompton Parkinson (Works) Private Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company) against that part of the award made in References (IT) Nos. 109 and 147 of 1956 by the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay on 8-1-l957 which concerns the demand of its workmen for bonus for the company s financial year 1954-55. That award was published in the Bombay Government Gazette of 17-1-l957 in Part IL at pages 351-364.
2. The material facts and circumstances leading up to the said award, as they appear from the evidence placed on record before the Tribunal, may shortly be stated as follows: The company was incorporated in India in the year 1987. The registered office of the company is at Bombay. The authorised capital of the company is Rs. 75 lacs divided into 75,000 ordinary shares of the value of Rs. 100 each. Out of the authorised capital, shares of the value of Rs.60 lacs have been issued, subscribed and fully paid. At its inception the company was 100 per cent, subsidiary of the well-known British company named Crompton Parkinson Ltd. (hereinafter called the Parent company). In 1937 the company commenced its business which was and is to manufacture electrical equipment such as transformers, motors, fans, starters anti switch gears and to sell the same in the market. All the goods, which the company manufactures, are manufactured wholly in accordance with patterns, designs, specifications and technical processes developed by and belonging to the Parent company which the latter makes available to the company. The company s products are sold under the trade names and marks belonging to the Parent company, namely, "Crompton Parkinson", "Crompton", "Parkinson" and "C. P.". Between 1937 and 1947 the company s business is said to have been in a stage of development and progress and it is admitted that the Parent company made no charge for the several services and facilities given by it to the company. In the year 1947, after the company s business had been established on a firm footing, an agreement was concluded between the two companies in order to provide, on a long term basis, for the continuance of the technical assistance and service and other facilities afforded by the Parent company on which the company was wholly dependent. That agreement, which is said to be of a type commonly executed between the manufacturing and industrial concerns in India and their respective associates, parents or affiliates abroad and generally known as "Technical Aid Agreements" is said to have received the approval of the Government of India to promote the industrial development of the country. That agreement was actually executed on 12-8-1947 and provided that for a period of 20 years the Parent company would render to the company various facilities and services, including, amongst others, the following;
"(i) the use of the latest designs, manufacturing information and production methods discovered and developed by Crompton Parkinson Ltd. ;
(ii) the fullest information and advice as to the most suitable machine tools and production machinery and equipment and as to the correct operation and use thereof;
(iii) the supply at cost of machinery, equipment, raw materials and manufacturing parts. Under this facility the appellants obtain the benefit of bulk purchase terms under which Crompton Parkinson Ltd. purchase their raw materials;
(iv) the benefit of the knowledge and experience of Crompton Parkinson Ltd. s executive in all matters relating to technical, mechanical and financial management;
(v) the service of the Crompton Parkinson. Ltd. s experts and technical personnel;
(vi) facilities for training of selected employees of the petitioners in Crompton Parkinson Ltd. s Works, and
(vii) licence to use on the appellants products the world-famous trademarks, "Crompton Parkinson", " Crompton", "Parkinson" and "C. P." belonging to Crompton Parkinson Limited."
In lieu of all royalties, licence fees and other conside
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.