MOTIBHAI NARSHIBHAI Vs. JIVTI BHAGWANJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who were the old partners of Ambika Pottery Works at Morvi challenge in this petition the order of the Labour Court dated April 7 for computing the benefit of notice pay and retrenchment compensation due to respondent No. 1 and which is ordered to be paid by the petitioners. The petitioners carried on the business of this concern namely Ambika Pottery Works in partnership. The said concern was taken over on November 1 1965 in an auction sale in a running condition by respondents Nos. 3 to 10 who constituted the new firm. Respondent No. 3 was common to both the old and the new firm. After the concern was thus taken over the respondent No. 1 workman applied to the Labour Court under sec. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act to have her dues under sec. 25FF computed on the ground that this transfer of the undertaking to the new partnership amounted to retrenchment and she was not paid any retrenchment compensation The petitioners old partners-as well as the respondents new partners disputed any such ##35/12 liability. The Labour Court held that as there was transfer of undertaking there was retrenchment. The condition of the proviso to sec. 25FF particularly condition (c) was not satisfied as there was nothing on the record to suggest that the services of the workmen were treated as continuous or that the new partners undertook to pay the retrenchment compensation on that basis of continuous service without any interruption. In view of the aforesaid finding the Labour Court has ordered computation of the said benefit of the notice pay and retrenchment compensation due to respondent No. 1 and has ordered that this amount should be recovered from the petitioners-old partners-jointly and severally. It is this order which is challenged in this petition by the petitioners.

(2.) Mr. Parikh at the time of hearing raised two points:-

(3.) As regards the first question the legal position is now well-settled. In the Board of Directors of the South Arcot Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. v. N. K. Mohmed Khan etc. 1969 (1) Supreme Court Cases 192 at page 199 their Lordships in terms reiterated the ratio of the earlier decisions as under :-