SEODUTT SINGH RAY Vs. ALI MAHAMMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Rule raises an interesting question as to the meaning of the word ''wages" occurring in section 60 (1) proviso (h) of the Code of Civil Procedure which is to the effect that the wages of laborers and domestic servants whether payable in money or in kind shall not be liable to attachment.

(2.) THE facts of the case are these. The petitioner obtained a decree for a sum of Rs. 627/- in the Court of Small Causes at Asansol against the opposite party who is a laborer in the Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. in their works at Kulti and he put that decree into execution in Small Cause Court Case No. 136 of 1956 and in the course of that execution attached a sum of Rs. 138/12/- which was payable to the opposite party by his employer as profit sharing bonus. The opposite party filed an objection under section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure claiming that this amount being a part of his wages was immune from attachment under the provisions of section 60 (1) proviso (h ). The executing court has allowed the objection filed by the opposite party and has withdrawn the attachment and against that order, the decree-holder has obtained this Rule under section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act.

(3.) MR. Ghose appearing in support of the Rule has argued that the profit sharing bonus payable to a worker by his employer cannot be held to be a part of the worker's wages within the meaning of the Civil Procedure Code. The word "wages" has not been defined by the Code of Civil Procedure though it has been defined in the different labor legislations in different ways. Section 2 (1) (m) of the Workmen's Compensation Act defines "wages" as including "any privilege or benefit which is capable of being estimated in money, other than a traveling allowance or the value of any traveling concession or a contribution paid by the employer to a workman towards any pension or provident fund or a sum paid to a workman to cover any special expenses entailed on him by the nature of his employment". Section 2 (6) of the Payment of Wages Act defines "wages" as meaning "all remuneration, capable of being expressed in terms of money, which would, if the terms of the contract of employment, express or implied, were fulfilled, be payable whether conditional upon the regular attendance, good work or conduct or other behavior of the person employed, or otherwise to a person employed in respect of his employment or of work done in such employment, and includes any bonus or other additional remuneration of the nature aforesaid which would be so payable and any sum payable to such a person by reason of the termination of his employment. " Section 2, clause (rr) of the Industrial Disputes Act as amended by Act 43 of 1953 defines wages as meaning "all remuneration capable of being expressed in terms of money which would, if the terms of employment, express or implied, were fulfilled, be payable to a workman in respect of his employment or of work done in such employment. . . . . . . . but it does not include (a) any bonus. . . . . . . . " The definitions given in these special Acts, however, are of no assistance for the present purpose because those definitions are intended to govern the rights of the employer and the worker for the purpose of those Acts and those definitions cannot be accepted for ascertaining the meaning of the word "wages" as used in the Code of Civil Procedure.