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

1951 Supreme(Cal) 223

GUHA, S.N.GUHA RAY
RAJENDRANATH KARMAKAR – Appellant
Versus
MANAGER, FRENCH MOTOR CAR CO. , LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PHANINDRA KUMAR SANYAL, RABIRANJAN DASGUPTA

GUHA, J.

( 1 ) THIS Rule was obtained by certain employees of Messrs. French Motor Car Co, Ltd. They filed an application before the authority under the Payment of Wages Act, 1930, praying for certain reliefs. The application was dismissed in toto. Against that decision an appeal was preferred before a Small Causes Court Judge Mr. Lahiri. The learned Judge, however, dismissed the appeal on a preliminary point holding that it was not maintainable on the ground that the authority appointed under the Payment of Wages Act did not give any direction under sub-section 3 or 4 of Section 15 of the Act. It is against this decision that the present Rule has been obtained.

( 2 ) IT is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the learned Judge was entirely in error in holding that no appeal lay in the circumstances of the present case. Under Section 17 of the Act an appeal against a direction made under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) of Section 15 may be preferred amongst others by any employed person if the total amount of wages claimed to have been withheld from him or from the unpaid group to which he belongs, exceeds Rs. 50. The learned Judge has held that as there was such direct

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