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

1960 Supreme(Cal) 132

S.C.LAHIRI, R.S.BACHAWAT
N. R. MUKHERJEE – Appellant
Versus
ARNOLD HARTMAN JUST – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.C.GUPTA, DIPAK SEN, P.B.Burman, P.K.SANYAL, P.P.Ginwalla

LAHIRI, C. J.

( 1 ) ALTHOUGH we have heard very interesting arguments on the question whether the business of a Chartered Accountant is an industry within the meaning of Section 2 (j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, we find it impossible to decide that question at the present stage. The first two appellants are two of the employees of a firm of Chartered Accountants named Messrs. Price Waterhouse Peat and Co. , and the third appellant is a discharged employee of that firm. The firm of Messrs. Price Waterhouse Peat and Co. represented by Respondents 1, 2 and 3 will be hereinafter described as the firm. A dispute having arisen with regard to the claim for bonus made by the first two appellants and the discharge of the third appellant the Employees' Association of the firm took up the dispute as a collective dispute and at its instance the Government of the State of West Bengal by an order dated July 1, 1955 referred the following issues to the First Industrial Tribunal for adjudication: 1. Whether deduction of bonus granted to Sri N. R. Mukherjee and Sri S. Kanungo (appellants Nos. 1 and 2 respectively) is justified? To what relief are they entitled?

( 2 ) IS the discharge of Pranto






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