9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (9) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aghavan, J. Three points are raised in this appeal against an order of our learned brother, Raman Nayar J. The first is that though Raman Nayar J. allowed some claims of the appellant, the General Secretary, Palai Central Bank Employees' Union, like dearness allowance, increments of salary, etc., those are not implemented by the respondent, the official liquidator. We do not think that this i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver. The closing down of the bank was something imposed on it by the order of the High Court and was, therefore, on account of unavoidable circumstances beyond its control. It was, in fact, in spite of and overruling objections against winding-up. The question that it was misconduct or mismanagement that brought about the winding-up is not relevant to the consideration whether the closing down was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the company is continued. The argument is that the business of the bank was continued under the official liquidator and, therefore, the notice under section 445(3) did not come into play. An alternate contention is that if the business was not continued after the winding-up order, then the subsequent employment under the liquidator was a new employment and not a continuation of the earlier emplo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case ( supra )). Chitty J. says in that case that when the bank closed its doors and ceased to carry on the business of banking even before the date of the winding-up order or at any rate. When the winding-up order was passed, the bank stopped the carrying on of its business, the banking business, in any proper sense of that term. Therefore, It is clear that in the case before us the winding-us ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the workers were given notice on 10th October, 1960, and in their case the winding-up order, which came in only on 5th December subsequent, could not have the effect of an order of discharge. But even in these cases the period of notice was extended by two months by the court and they were actually discharged only on 12th December, 1960. This shows that they were given salary for more than the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
