The main legal point established in the judgment is that legal heirs are not responsible to satisfy the liability arising out of the breach of provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 if they do not inherit the establishment.

JUDGMENT :

J.C. DOSHI, J.

1. In this intra-court appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellant challenges the judgment and order dated 14/12/2021 rendered in Special Civil Application No. 7100 of 2008, whereby the learned Single Judge has overturned the award passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 3, Ahmedabad in Reference (LCA) No. 128 of 1994.

2. The facts garnered from the pleadings in nutshell are that late Dr. Babulal L. Desai was running Sharadbabu Hospital at Satyamnagar, Rakhial, Ahmedabad. The appellant was serving as nurse alongwith other four nurse in the said hospital. According to the appellant, her services were orally terminated on 29/07/1993 and she therefore, raised an industrial dispute which culminated into Reference LCA No. 128 of 1994 before learned Labour Court, Ahmedabad. During the pendency of the said Reference, Dr. Babulal L. Desai expired. An application was moved at Exhibit-26 in the said Reference to join the heirs and legal representatives of deceased-Dr. Babulal L. Desai which was allowed and as such the present respondents were joined as party in the said reference.

2.1 The Labour Court, after considering the evidence on record has partly allowed the said reference and while denying the prayer of reinstatement in service, has granted lump sum amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.1.00 Lakh.

2.2 Aggrieved by the said award, the respondents preferred Special Civil Application No. 7100 of 2008 before this Court. This Special Civil Application came to be allowed by overturning the award passed by the Labour Court which has given rise to the present intra-court appeal.

3. Learned Advocate Mr. Krunal D Pandya for the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge has erred in allowing the SCA whereby the impugned award was quashed and set aside. He would further submit that findings and reasoning arrived at by the learned Single Judge are not in consonance with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He would further submit that the respondents were joined by virtue of the order passed below Exhibit-26. Since they were carrying immovable property of late Dr. B.L. Desai, they were duty to bound to adhere to the liability of Dr. B.L. Desai; however the learned Single Judge erroneously took the contrary view. He would further submit that since the hospital which was run by Dr. B.L. Desai, has been taken over by the respondents, the relationship of employee and employer as defined under the ID Act will continue between the appellant and respondent; but the learned Single Judge has failed to comprehend such legal position and has committed error of law; much less error of misunderstanding of provisions of law.

3.1 By pressing into the service the judgment of this Court in the case of Rasulbhai Pirbhai Shaikh vs. Jasumatiben Indravadan Trivedi Wd/o Indravadan Shankarlal Trivdei, 1993 (1) GLR 519, learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the issue which was cropped up before the learned Single Judge was squarely covered by the said judgment because in view of the findings arrived at in the said judgment, the rights of the workman against the employer cannot be made to die with the employer. He would further submit that taking the view that the relationship of employee and employer snapped on the death of the employer would not be justified in view of the provisions of the Industrial Tribunal Act. He would further submit that neither of the provisions of the ID Act or any principles of law permit to take the view that relationship of employee and employer will be snapped on demise of the employer.

3.2 Pressing into service such submissions, learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge has seriously erred in overturning the well reasoned award passed by the Labour Court. By making the above submissions, he would submit that the present appeal may be allowed quashing and setting aside the impugned oral judgment of learned Single