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

ABEYGOONESEKERA v. SINNATHAMBY


Abeygoonesekera V. Sinnathamby

1951 Present: Nagalingam J.

ABEYGOONESEKERA,
Appellant, and SINNATHAMBY, Respondent

S. C. 1,096-M. C. Colombo, 1,990/A

Wages Boards Ordinance, No. 27 of 1941-Section 58-Meaning of " trade "- Minimum wage-Employer and worker may be engaged in two different trades.

The accused was charged that he, " being an employer in a trade, to wit,. the motor transport trade", failed to pay the lorry driver employed by him the prescribed minimum wage. It was proved by the accused that he used the lorry as merely ancillary to his business of engineering and drainage-contractor.

Held, that in the circumstances the accused could not be said to be engaged in the motor transport trade and, therefore, could not be convicted under the charge preferred against him.

Semble, the accused could have been convicted if the charge against him. had been that he, being an employer of a worker in a trade, to wit, the motor transport trade, failed to pay such worker his minimum wage. The definition of " trade " in section 58 of the Wages Boards Ordinance includes the occupations or calling of a worker, irrespective of what the trade of the employer may be.









































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