JUDGMENT :- The plaintiff sues the defendant company for the recovery of the sum of Rs. 6,134 as being the gratuity alleged to be earned by the plaintiff as an employee of the defendant company. The defendant company resists the plaintiffs claim on the ground that the bye-laws which entitled the plaintiff at one stage of his service to claim the gratuity had been altered before the termination of the plaintiffs services. The vexed question as to how far a company by altering its bye-laws can prejudicially affect an employees contract of service has been raised in this suit.

2. The facts may be stated very briefly. The plaintiff was appointed Secretary of the Company in October 1924 at a salary of Rs. 150 per month and it is the pleading of the plaintiff that such appointment was subject to and in terms of the regulations contained in the then bye-laws of the defendant company. He thereafter rose to the position of the Officiating General Manager of the Company in 1932-33. His services were terminated in December 1939 and he was admittedly paid his Provident Fund.

3. When he joined service of the defendant company as its secretary the bye-laws of the company at the time did not entitl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document