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

2020 Supreme(SC) 15

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, K.M.JOSEPH
Indian Bank – Appellant
Versus
Promila – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :Madhu Sikri, Advocate
For the Respondent(s):Debesh Panda, Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.

1. One Jagdish Raj, husband of respondent No.1 and father of respondent No.2, was appointed as a Clerk-cum-Shroff in the appellant-Bank, where he continued to work till his unfortunate demise on 15.1.2004. He was drawing a gross monthly salary of Rs.16,486.60 at the time of his demise. Consequent to his death, the benefits available for the family of Jagdish Raj were calculated and sanctioned to the tune of Rs.5,45,872, but on account of deductions for staff housing and vehicle loans, post adjustment, a net payment of Rs.2,99,672 was made to the family, apart from the grant of a monthly pension of Rs.5,574.12. An issue has been raised about the amount being paid less to the family of Jagdish Raj, but that has really not been debated before us.

2. Late Shri Jagdish Raj was survived by his wife and three minor children. As it transpires, respondent No.1 was already employed and earning a salary at the time of the demise of her husband, which information came to the knowledge of the appellant-Bank, later. The cause for the present dispute arises from an application made on behalf of the son (respondent No.2 herein) seeking compassionate employment on acc


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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top