Review petition challenging an order awarding interest on gratuity left open. The bench deleted the award of interest and directed the dispute to be settled by the Payment of Gratuity Act authority on merits.
The order awarding interest on gratuity was deleted; the dispute to be settled by the Payment of Gratuity Act authority.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.DENESAN
TUESDAY, THE 13TH MARCH 2007 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1928
RP.No. 194 of 2007(N) ------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.32892/2006 DATED 14/12/2006.
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS:
---------------------------------------------------------
1. HINDUSTAN INSECTICIDES LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, SCOPE COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 003.
2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, HIL, UDYOGAMANDAL-683 501.
BY ADV. SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR.
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
----------------------------------------
MARY V.V. (EX.B.NO.1096, ACCOUNTANT SPECIAL GRADE HIL), RESIDING AT `AMBAT', MANKUZHY ROAD, EDAPPALLY TOLL, KOCHI-682 024.
BY ADV. SRI.ANTONY M.AMBAT.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/03/2007,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.K.DENESAN, J.
R.P. NO: 194 OF 2007 IN WP(C)No. 32892 OF 2006
Dated this the 13th March, 2007.
O R D E R
The review petitioners are the respondents in W.P(C) 32892/2006. Review is sought for in respect of that portion of the judgment where this Court held that the writ petitioner will be entitled to interest on the amount of gratuity at the statutory rate. It is contended by the review petitioners that the question as to whether the petitioner was entitled to interest on the amount of gratuity was not a matter of serious discussion at the final hearing of the writ petition as it was agreed by both parties that the writ petition can be disposed of following the observations, findings and reliefs granted as per Ext.P3 judgment to the petitioner therein who is the first respondent in Ext.P4 judgment of the Division Bench. The review petitioners have no quarrel with that part of the judgment by which they are directed to disburse the differential amount of gratuity and other admissible terminal benefits based on the revised pay.
petitioners that the writ petitioner is not entitled to interest on the amount of gratuity at the statutory rate
R.P 194/2007 in WPC 32892/2006 2
for reasons stated in the review petition. Counsel for the writ petitioner submits that he will be able to satisfy this Court that the writ petitioner is entitled for interest on the amount of gratuity.
R.P 194/2007 in WPC 32892/2006 3 authority, the same shall be considered on merits and settled in that forum. Review petition is disposed of accordingly.
K.K.DENESAN Judge
jj
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the reviewing court should uphold the order awarding interest on gratuity when the issue was not debated during the original hearing.
Whether the entitlement to interest on gratuity should be reserved for determination by the Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act.
Hindustan Insecticides Limited
Mary V.V.
K.K.DENESAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
