A civil suit for recovery of excess gratuity payments is maintainable despite provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, as it addresses overpayment rather than non-payment.

JUDGMENT :

HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR, J.

1. This appeal is filed by the defendant challenging the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2019 passed by the Court of XI Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore City, in O.S.No.3954/2012, thereby, the suit filed for recovery of money is decreed.

2. The rank of parties is referred to as per their rankings before the trial court.

3. It is the case of plaintiff as per plaint averments in brief that the plaintiff is a transport corporation and the defendant was appointed as a Conductor and retired from the service on 31.08.2004 after attaining the age of superannuation. At the time of retirement, the defendant has received gratuity amount of Rs. 1,69,740/-.

4. The defendant has filed an application before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Controlling Authority, Bengaluru, under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short ‘the Act’) claiming a sum of Rs. 1,61,644/- towards difference in gratuity. On 12.09.2007 the Controlling Authority determined the gratuity payable to the defendant at Rs. 2,24,050/- after deducting a sum of Rs. 1,69,740/- already paid and ordered to pay balance of Rs. 1,04,310/- with interest for 3 years at Rs. 31,293/- p.a., totally Rs. 1,35,603/-.

5. Both plaintiff and the defendant preferred the appeals before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority allowed the appeal filed by the defendant and dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiff and after deducting the amount already paid of Rs. 1,69,740/-, the gratuity was re-determined at Rs. 2,83,500/- and directed to pay balance of Rs. 1,13,760/- with interest at 10% p.a.

6. It is the case of the plaintiff that while preferring the appeal the plaintiff has deposited a sum of Rs. 1,15,381/- as per Section 7 of the Act. Against the order passed by the Appellate Authority on 26.06.2008 three writ petitions were filed in W.P.No.10836/2008 by the Corporation and the workman has filed W.P.No.12180/2008 and W.P.No.11914/2008. This Court on 09.03.2009 has allowed all the writ petitions by passing common order and remanded the matters to the Controlling Authority to determine the gratuity afresh. After remand, the Controlling Authority on 26.05.2011 has re-determined the gratuity at Rs. 1,70,719/- after deducting a sum of Rs. 1,69,740/-, which was already paid and it was ordered the balance of Rs. 979/- to be payable to the defendant, but the defendant had already withdrawn the amount of Rs. 1,15,381/-, which was the amount deposited by the plaintiff while preferring the appeal before the appellate authority. Therefore, the defendant has received the amount twice totaling to amount of Rs.2,85,121/- and therefore, this is observed by the Controlling Authority in its order. Therefore, the plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of money.

7. The defendant has filed the written statement denying all the averments made in the plaint. It is contended that the defendant has correctly received the amount and there is no double claim made by the defendant or there is no excess amount received by the defendant and whatever the defendant is entitled to receive the gratuity amount, the same has been received. Therefore prays to dismiss the suit.

8. Upon pleadings, the trial court has framed the following issues:

(1) Whether the plaintiff proves that the defendant is liable to pay the amount of Rs.1,14,402/- as stated in para No.6 of the plaint?

(2) Whether the suit is barred by limitation?

(3) Whether the civil court has no jurisdiction to try the suit in view of Sec.13 of Payment of Gratuity Act 1972?

(4) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for th