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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 76334

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mrs.Justice N. MALA
THE MANAGEMENT OF – Appellant
Versus
WORKMEN OF KWANG – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19-11-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA

WP No. 1372 of 2024 & WMP.No.1404/2024

The Management of Kuwang Sung

Break India Private Limited rep.by its

Managing Director, No.49,

Sengattugramam

Sriperumbudur Taluk

Kanchipuram District Pin.602105.

Petitioner(s)

Vs

Workmen of Kuwang Sung Break

India Private Limited, through United Labour Federation rep.by its Secretary

Reg.No.2657/CNI, No.149,

Thambuchetty Street, CJ Complex, 4th

Floor, Chennai 600 001.

Respondent(s)

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records in OP.No.31/2020 dated 10.10.2023 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal, at

Chennai, and quash the same.

For Petitioner(s): G.Muthuraman

For Respondent(s): Mr.V.Prakash, Senior Advocate

for Ms.A.M.Radhaa Priya

ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the Industrial Tribunal, at (1)

Chennai, dated 10.10.2023 in OP.NO.31/2020. (2)The respondent is referred to as 'the Union'.

Facts in brief:-

The petitioner is a Factory engaged in the manufacture of automobiles spare (3)

parts such as bearings, welding equipments, etc. The petitioner in its Factory, has 650 workers, in various pay scales on its rolls. While so, the Union filed OP.No.31/2020, on the file of the Industrial Tribunal, at Chennai, claiming 20% bonus for all its workers for the period 2017-18 and for ex-gratia of Rs.15,000/- for each of the employee on the basis of the Profit and Loss Account of that year. The petitioner, in its counter statement, denied the claim for bonus and ex-gratia as unfair and unjustified. The petitioner submitted that the petitioner paid to its workers regularly the bonus at 14.5% in terms of the provisions of the Payment of Bonus Act, and that, it was not in a position to pay the maximum bonus of 20% and ex-gratia of Rs.15,000/- demanded by the workmen. The petitioner further submitted that the online Balance Sheet would establish that the petitioner regularly paid the bonus as per the Payment of Bonus Act. The petitioner/Management, therefore prayed for dismissal of the OP.No.31/2020.

The Industrial Tribunal, on an appreciation of the entire evidence on record, (4)

passed the impugned Award, holding that the demand for 20% bonus by the workmen, in respect of the Accounting Year 2017-18, was justified and further, directed the petitioner/Management to pay the remaining bonus of 5.5% after deducting the bonus of 14.5% already paid for the said year. The claim of the workmen for ex-gratia payment was rejected by the Industrial Tribunal as withdrawn by the Union. Aggrieved by the Award of the Industrial Tribunal, insofar as it relates to the payment of differential bonus of 5.5% for the Accounting Year 2017-18, the petitioner/Management has filed the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief.

The learned counsel for the petitioner / Management vehemently contended (5)

that the Industrial Tribunal, failed to note that the petitioner paid customary bonus during the festivals like, Diwali, Pongal and Ayutha Pooja continuously irrespective of loss or profit. The learned counsel submitted that if the amount paid towards festival bonus is taken into consideration, then the bonus paid by the petitioner / Management would be much more than the 20% bonus demanded by the Union. The learned counsel, submitted that the failure of the Industrial Tribunal to take into consideration, the customary/festival bonus paid by the petitioner resulted in injustice to the petitioner and therefore, prayed that the writ petition be allowed.

The learned counsel for the respondent/Union submitted that the Industrial (6)

Tribunal considered all the submissions, including the submission pertaining to customary bonus and only thereafter, allowed the claim. The learned counsel further submitted that the order of the Industrial Tribunal is based on proper appreciation of the entire materials on record and therefore, in the absence

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 Back to top