MANUEL TRAVASSO Vs. NATIONAL AUTO ACCESSORIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though the facts in the above appeal are similar to the facts in the Company Appeal no.1/2012 which came to be disposed of today, there are additional grounds recorded by the Official Liquidator while rejecting the claim of the appellant.

(2.) The Official Liquidator has taken note of the fact that the appellant had approached the Labour Court way back in the year 2002 putting up a claim with regard to the arrears of his salary and wages payable by the company in liquidation and the Official Liquidator was also party to such proceedings. The Official Liquidator raised the contention therein that such proceedings could not be proceeded without seeking leave of this Court as the Official Liquidator was already appointed and proceedings for liquidation were in progress. The appellant thereafter withdrew the application with liberty to raise the claim before the appropriate forum.

(3.) It is the contention of Ms. A. Razaq that after obtaining such leave the appellant did not choose to seek leave of this Court to proceed to get his claim adjudicated before the Tribunal but on the contrary chose to file a claim before the Official Liquidator in the year 2004.