SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(SC) 14

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
H.R. KHANNA, P.N. BHAGWATI AND S. MURTAZA FAZL ALI,. JJ.
Workmen of National and Grindlays Bank Ltd., Appellants
Versus
The National and Grindlays Bank Ltd., Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 2533 of 1969
Decided on 16-1-1976.
Advocates appeared
Mr. M. K. Ramamurthi, Sr. Advocate, (M/s. Ramesh Pathak and Vineet Kumar, Advocates with him), for Appellants; Mr. G. B. Pail, Sr. Advocate (M/s. O.C. Mathur and D. N. Mishra, Advocates with him), for Respondents.

Advocates:
D.N.Mishra, G.B.PAI, J.B.DADACHAN, M.K.RAMAMURTHY, RAMESH PATHAK, S.O.C.MATHUR, VINIT KUMAR

Headnote:

Banking Companies Act, 1949 – Section 5 – Special leave – Employment and Service - Appeal by special leave is directed against an award made by the Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta in a reference between the National and Grindlays Bank Ltd and its workmen represented by the All India National and Grindlays Bank Employees Federation – Bank is a banking company within the meaning of Section 5 of the Banking Companies Act, 1949 and has its Head Office in London and branch office in different parts of the world, including India – principal office of the Bank in India is situate in Calcutta – Bank maintains its accounts according to the calendar year and it brings out not only a consolidated balance sheet and profit and loss account for its world business, but also a separate balance sheet and profit and loss account for its Indian business – There was an industrial dispute between the Bank and its workmen in regard to bonus as a result of negotiations, this industrial dispute was settled between the parties on an ad hoc basis under a Memorandum of Settlement material terms of the settlement were –Held, The Industrial Tribunal interpreted the words working funds to mean "paid up capital reserves and deposits" and rejected the contention of the Bank the they also included borrowing from other banking companies bills payable and balance of profit and loss account – This view taken by the Industrial Tribunal was assailed on behalf of the Bank at the hearing of the appeal before us – Bank contended that borrowings from other banking companies the amounts of bills issued by the Bank and balance of profit and loss account constituted part of the working funds of the Bank and were therefore, within the expression "working funds – contention plausible though it may seem at first sight, is in our opinion, not well founded – Words "working funds" when used in relation to a banking company, are not to be construed in their ordinary popular sense by reference to dictionary –They have a history of their own and they have acquired a definite meaning – These words were first defined in the award made in regard to banks and the definition he gave was that working funds consisted of "paid-up capital reserves and deposits – So far as banking companies are concerned the words working funds have always been understood in this sense and that is the sense in which they must be deemed to have been used by the Legislature when it enacted clause (ii) and (iii) of the proviso to Item 2 of the Third Schedule. It is a well-settled rule of interpretation that when the Legislature uses certain words which have acquired a definite meaning over a period of time, it must be assumed that those words have been used by the Legislature in the same sense – Ordered accordingly.

JUDGMENT

BHAGWATI, J. :—This appeal by special leave is directed against an award made by the Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta in a reference between the National and Grindlays Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) and its workmen represented by the All India National and Grindlays Bank Employees Federation. The Bank is a banking company within the meaning of Section 5 of the Banking Companies Act, 1949 and has its Head Office in London and branch office in different parts of the world, including India. The principal office of the Bank in India is situate in Calcutta. The Bank maintains its accounts according to the calendar year and it brings out not only a consolidated balance sheet and profit and loss account for its world business, but also a separate balance sheet and profit and loss account for its Indian business. There was an industrial dispute between the Bank and its workmen in regard to bonus for the years 1956 to 1964 and as a result of negotiations, this industrial dispute was settled between the parties on an ad hoc basis under a Memorandum of Settlement dated 28th December, 1965. The material terms of the settlement were :

"1. The Bank will pay and the workmen and non-workmen staff will receive a sum of Rs. 27 Lakh (Rupees twentyseven lakhs only) in full and final settlement of all bonus claims covering the periods from 1st January 1956 to 31st December, 1964, including any claims relating to Centenary Bonus.

2. The above sum of Rs. 27 lakhs will be allocated as to one-third thereof to Award-staff only and as to the remaining two-thirds to both the Award and non-Award staff, in both cases based on the basic salary paid over the period, namely 1st January, 1956 to 31st December, 1964, and unrelated to any particular year.

* * * *

8. The parties agree that this Settlement shall not be taken as the basis or govern the principle for this determination of bonus in future, but nevertheless this Settlement shall be final and binding on the parties as regards bonus claims for the years 1956 to 1964 (both inclusive) and any claim relating to Centenary Bonus, as also regards qualifications for eligibility and procedure as set out above." It may be noted that this Settlement was arrived at between the parties after the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 came into force on 25th September, 1965. This Act provided a statutory formula for computation and payment of bonus and it was admittedly applicable in respect of the accounting year 1964, but no separate computation of bonus for that year was made in accordance with this statutory formula and it was settled on an ad hoc basis as a part of an omnibus settlement for the accounting years 1956 to 1964. So far as the claim for bonus for the accounting year 1965 was concerned, computation was made in accordance with the statutory formula provided in the Payment of Bonus Act and the maximum 28 of the salary or wage earned during that accounting year was paid by way of bonus to the workmen. The claim for bonus for the accounting year 1966, however, could not be settled between the parties and though the Bank paid 18 of the wage or salary earned by the workmen during that accounting year as 613 bonus, the workmen were not satisfied and the industrial dispute arising from their claim had to be referred for adjudication. There were different aspects of this industrial dispute which required consideration and the Central Government, therefore, formulated each aspect as a separate question and referred those questions for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta. The Industrial Tribunal made an award holding that, on an application of the statutory formula, the amount available for payment of bonus was Rs. 22.17 lakhs and the workmen were, therefore, entitled to a little over 9 of their salary or wage as bonus, but since they had already been paid by the Bank bonus at the rate of 18 of their salary or wage, which was much more than what they were entitled to receive, nothing fu








































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top