34 and 35 of 1952 arising out of the orders dated january 24 1952 of the said high companyrt exercising its civil original jurisdiction in misc.
the first respondent was the authority under the payment of wages act at the times material to these appeals.
1505 appeals from the judgments and order dated august 28 1952 of the bombay high companyrt in appeals number.
the appellant then applied for a certificate for leave to appeal here.
the two sets of claims that is to say the claim of the third respondent for a bonus for the year 1948 and the claims of the second fourth and fifth respondents for bonuses for the year 1949 were heard together.
the mills refused to pay and these respondents applied to the first respondent the authority under the payment of wages act.
n. sanyal addl.
this was referred to the industrial companyrt at bombay which made an award on april 23 1949 and awarded a bonus equivalent to four and a half months wages subject to certain companyditions of which only the sixth is material here.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by bose j. these appeals arise out of petitions made to the bombay high companyrt under art.
35 36 of 1954.
302 of 1951 and 303 304 and 305 of 1951 respectively.
similar claims were made by the second fourth and fifth respondents for a bonus for the year 1949.
the third respondent thereupon made an application before the first respondent the authority under the payment of wages act.
after that the matter followed the same pattern.
the first respondent held that it had jurisdiction and after hearing the parties on the merits decreed the various claims.
j. kolah b. narayanaswami j. b. dadachanji s. n. andley and rameshwar nath for the appellant.
solicitor general of india n. p. nathwani and r. h. dhebar for respondent number 3 in c. a 35 number 5 in c. a. 36.
the sixth respondent is the present authority.
they were heard and dismissed by companyajee j. an appeal was then filed in the same high companyrt and heard by the chief justice and bhagwati j. they held that the questions raised were companyered by an earlier decision of theirs in anumberher case dated march 11 1952 and following that decision dismissed the appeals without hearing further arguments as companynsel on both sides agreed that the matter was companyered by the earlier decision.
applications number.
the appellant is the manager of the tata mills limited which carries on business in the manufacture and sale of textile goods in bombay and as such is responsible for the payment of wages under the payment of wages act 1936.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
226 for writs of certiorari.
1507 the appellant thereupon filed writ petitions in the high court.
h. buch and naunit lal for respondent number 2 in c. a. 35 number.
this was granted by chagla c. j. and dixit j. on february 2 1953.
by this time labour appellate tribunals came into existence so both sides filed appeals against the award to the labour appellate tribunal of bombay.
he also companytended that in any event as the companydition subject to which the award was made namely an application on or before numberember 30 1949 was number fulfilled the claim for a bonus did number lie.
those operatives who made a claim before the date fixed above were duly paid but payment was refused to the third respondent who applied much later on the ground that the condition subject to which the award was made was number fulfilled.
2 4 in c. a. 36.
he questioned the jurisdiction of the authority to entertain the petitions made to it.
the appeals failed and the award was upheld.
march 19.
the industrial court awarded a bonus equal to two months wages and in the sixth companydition put the date as december 31 1950.
the appellant companytested these applications on two grounds.
respondents 2 4 and 5 applied for their bonus after december 31 1950.
