Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Nut Products Company vs Christopher

Madras High Court|11 January, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The prayer in the writ petition is for a writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the 2nd respondent pertaining to its preliminary award dated 11.10.2011 and consequential final award dated 18.09.2012 in Industrial Dispute No.14/2010 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same.
2. As against the impugned award passed by the 2nd respondent Labour Court, by which, the 2nd respondent has directed the petitioner to reinstate the first respondent with continuity of service and all legally entitled financial benefits, however, without any order as to backwages, the petitioner has come out with this writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 1st respondent.
4. The petitioner has subsequently filed W.M.P.No.15627/2016 in W.P.No.16089/2012 along with a compromise memo entered into between the petitioner and the 1st respondent in the month of September 2016. Today, the learned counsel for both sides submitted that settlement has been arrived at between the petitioner and the first respondent out of Court and the terms of the said settlement has been reduced into writing in memorandum of compromise filed along with this petition and on that basis, this writ petition can be disposed of.
5. The memorandum of compromise dated 12.09.2016, contains the following:
?Memo of compromise, entered into between the petitioner, Nut Products Company, Paloor, Karungal Post, Kanyakumari District, having Administrative Office at Vijayalaxmi Cashew Company, 9/7 Main Road, Kuzhithurai, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District and represented by its Proprietor Preetha S.Nair, and the first respondent, Christopher, Son of Johnrose, Nellikkavilai Veedu, Paloor, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District in the above writ petition.
With the intervention and advice of well-wishers, the petitioner and the first respondent have amicably settled the dispute in the above writ petition, and have entered into this memorandum of compromise, which witnesseth as follows:
1.The first respondent is hereby withdrawing industrial Dispute No.14/2010 on the file of the labour Court, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District, on payment to him of all his dues from the petitioner towards full settlement of all his claims from the petitioner, the receipt whereof he hereby acknowledges, and the said Industrial Dispute No.14/2010 shall stand dismissed.
2.The first respondent shall hereafter have no claim from the petitioner.
3.The second respondent, being only a formal party to the writ petition, the writ petition shall stand dismissed as against the second respondent.
4.The parties to the writ petition shall bear their respective costs in the writ petition.
5.The writ petition shall stand disposed of in terms of this memorandum of compromise.
Dated at Kuzhithurai this the 12th day of September 2016?.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner also in the presence of the 1st respondent has produced a cheque drawn on Indian Bank, Kaliyakavilai, Kanyakumari District, (No.101411, dated 11.01.2017), by which, the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.24,603/- to the first respondent towards the full and final settlement. The first respondent, who is also present in the Court, has acknowledged the same.
7. In view of the terms of the said compromise memo as well as the fact that the first respondent has received the full settlement amount from the petitioner, there is no further issue to be decided in this writ petition. Hence, taking on record the said compromise memo filed by the petitioner and the first respondent, jointly, dated 12.09.2016, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the compromise. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
To The Labour Court, Tirunelveli Tirunelveli District Represented by its Presiding Officer .
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Nut Products Company vs Christopher

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
11 January, 2017