MURUDHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK Vs. BHAGWAN RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Authority under the Payment of Wages Act decided the matter in favour of the workman on April 10, 1990 and awarded Rs. 3388/- as compensation to the workman. The employer applied for certified copy of the order on that very day; vide registered No. 130 of 1990. It is averred that no date for delivery was given and copy was made available to the employer on May 10, 1990 and without loss of time, an appeal was filed on May 11, 1990. on May 19, 1990 the amount of Rupees 3388/- was deposited and the certificate of payment was produced on the record of the appeal on that very day. According to the learned counsel for the employer, the last date of filing of the appeal and deposit was June 11, 1990 and therefore, even if appeal is deemed to have been filed on May 19, 1990, when the certificate of deposit was produced on record, it was within time. However, the appellate court dismissed the appeal as not maintainable on the ground that Section 17 (1-A) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (for short 'the Act') envisages that the certificate of deposit has to accompany the memorandum of appeal and since on May 11, 1990 the appeal was not accompanied by the certificate of deposit, the appeal was not maintainable and by the order dated December 10, 1992 the appeal was dismissed as such. This is revision by the employer against that order.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the employer urges in support of the revision that true meaning and scope of the beneficial legislation contained in Section 17 (1-A) has not been appreciated by the appellate court. The idea is that within the period of limitation the appeal should be filed so also the appellate court should be informed that the amount awarded has been deposited by producing a certificate thereof- This beneficial legislation is for the purpose that in case appeal is dismissed or the order of the trial court is modified, the amount which is payable to the employee should be paid to him without loss of time.

(3.) THE learned counsel urges that if the relevant provision of appeal is correctly read and understood, it would show that no appeal shall lie unless the memorandum of appeal is accompanied by certificate of deposit. Therefore, he says that until the deposit is made, no appeal shall lie. He says that it does not mean that in-spite of actual filing of appeal within limitation and inspite of actual deposit of amount and production of the certificate within time, a Court of law can say that the appeal did not lie or the appeal will be dismissed as not maintainable.