High CourtsDivision Bench(2010) 04 BOM CK 0018

Hegde H.S.T. vs Premier Automobiles Ltd. and Another

Bombay High Court · Decided on 13 April 2010 · Citation: (2010) 125 FLR 941

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.R. Kingaonkar, J · D.K. Deshmukh, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
O.O.C.J.A. No. 241 of 2006 in Writ Petition No. 1459 of 2002

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 248 words
1.

By this Appeal the appellant challenges the order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court dated March 31, 2005 in Writ Petition No. 1459/2002. By that order the learned single Judge has modified the order of the Labour court made u/s 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court had directed, payment of amount of incentive allowance with interest from the date of application till the date of realisation. The learned single Judge relying on two judgments of this Court, one in the case of Payal Electronics v. Arun Vasant Pawar (2002) III CLR 328 and the second in Swan Mills Limited and Another Vs. Sakharam Dhondu Panchal and Others, , has held, that u/s 33C(2) the Labour Court cannot award interest from the date earlier to the date on which the Labour Court makes the order, and therefore the learned single Judge has held that the Labour Court could not have awarded the interest from, the date of the application.

2.

We have heard the learned Counsel for both sides.

3.

In view of the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid judgments and in view of the fact that the role of the Labour Court when it decides an application u/s 33C(2) is of the nature of executing Court, in our opinion, therefore, no fault can be found with the order of the learned single Judge modifying the order of the Labour Court. Appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed.