KCP LTD Vs. V K KSHIRSAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal is directed against the concurrent findings of both the Courts below.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff Mr.V.K.Kshirsagar was appointed as Consultant (Welding) by appointment order dated 14.10.1997 in the appellant/defendant's TMRD Unit with consolidated salary of Rs.25,000/- per month. In the said order of appointment, clause 9 specifically says that his contract will be terminated at any time either party giving 30 days notice to the other during the first year of service and thereafter 180 days notice in writing or payment in lieu thereof. This clause No.9 mentioned in the appointment order dated 14.10.1997 has become subject matter of issue before both the Courts below and also before this Court. When the Appellant/Defendant's company terminated the services of the Plaintiff/Respondent by letter dated 14.2.2000 with effect from 15.3.2000 by giving one month notice, the termination was challenged as illegal since the same was not in accordance with Clause 9 of the appointment letter dated 14.10.1997 which contemplates six months notice for termination.

(3.) The appellant Company is neither a statutory body nor Government department. During the course of plaintiff's service, it appears that the appellant Company has circulated various office notices giving certain benefits to the employees including the respondent herein. It appears as customary practice in the appellant-Company to issue periodical notifications. While so, Ex.B3 office note dated 15.6.1998 containing certain benefits was also issued making certain amendments to the staff regulations, including change in the notice period for all management staff/consultant followed by notice dated 11.1.1999 viz. Ex.B4 spelling out travelling allowance, local conveyance, leave entitlement and notice period for all staff. In accordance with the office note dated 11.1.1999, the plaintiff was provided with free lunch, local conveyance by way of pick up and drop facilities along with leave entitlement. In terms of Ex.B4 dated 11.1.1999, when the plaintiff/respondent's services were terminated by the appellant by giving one month notice as against 180 days notice, the same was challenged by filing the suit on the file of VIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court at Chennai praying for judgment and decree directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs.1,33,760/- with interest on a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- at 18% per annum from the date of plaint till realisation and also costs of the suit on the ground that the plaintiff/respondent has rendered service in the defendant Company for more than 28 months on a monthly salary of Rs.25,000/-. After 28 months of service, the defendant/appellant by letter dated 14.2.2000 wrongly terminated the services of the plaintiff/respondent with effect from 15.3.2000 with one month's notice as against the original terms of appointment mentioned in the letter of appointment dated 14.10.1997, in and by which, the defendant/appellant herein was required to give 180 days notice in writing or payment in lieu thereof.