RFA--53/2011. Case: DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. SIRI KRISHAN. High Court of Delhi (India)
| Case Number | RFA--53/2011 |
| Citation | NA |
| Judgement Date | August 13, 2019 |
| Court | High Court of Delhi (India) |
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision:- 13
+ RFA No.53/2011
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.U.N. Tiwary, Adv.
versus
SIRI KRISHAN ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Rajiv Nanda, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL)
1. The present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure impugns judgment and decree dated 12.07.2010 passed the learned Additional District Judge, (Central-13), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Civil Suit No.132/2008, whereunder the suit filed by the appellant seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.3,30,097/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 09.09.1998, from the respondent was dismissed on the grounds of limitation as well as on merits.
2. The facts as necessary for adjudication of the appeal may be hereinbelow.
3. The respondent while working as a Conductor with the Corporation was, based on the finding of a domestic enquiry,
from service on 01.08.1974, which dismissal was assailed by him raising an
industrial dispute. The respondent succeeded before the labour Court which, its award dated 18.01.1988, set aside his dismissal from service by a penalty of stoppage of six increments on him. The award also
the appellant to reinstate the respondent with 50% backwages. The award dated 18.01.1988 came to be challenged by the appellant
this Court by way of a writ petition [C.W.P 2229/1988] and this was pleased to issue notice in the petition wherein no stay of the impugned award was granted in favour of the appellant. However, since the not comply with the terms of the award despite there being no granted therein, the respondent moved an application before this Court a direction to the appellant to implement the award. When the application came up for hearing before this Court on
18.02.1991, the following order was passed:-
“The impugned order has not been stayed by this court. By the said order, the applicant was directed to be reinstated with full back wages. Since the order has not been stayed, the applicant is entitled to be reinstated. Accordingly, he may join so that he can draw his wages.”
It appears that the respondent, armed with the order passed by this on 18.02.1991wherein it was observed that he was entitled to be with full back wages, approached the appellant who, after taking opinion of its Legal Advisor vide its letter dated 15.11.1991, directed the rejoin service. The respondent, accordingly, re-joined service
29.11.1991...
To continue reading
Request your trial