Composite on-board linen service, not mere washing, was upheld on concurrent findings and limitation plea failed.

The contracts and record showed that the appellant did not provide mere washing services for railway linen, but a composite on-board service to passengers by collecting used linen at the railway station and replacing it with washed linen. That factual finding was concurrent and supported by the material on record, so no appellate interference was warranted. The separate plea of limitation was not found to have been raised before the Tribunal in the recorded submissions, and therefore did not justify interference. The finding on the nature of work was upheld and the appeal was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was rendering only washing services in relation to railway linen, or a composite on-board service to passengers, and whether any plea of limitation warranted interference.

Analysis: The contracts and record supported the finding that the appellant collected used linen at the railway station and replaced it with washed linen, amounting to a composite on-board service to passengers. The finding was concurrent and based on the material on record, leaving no basis for appellate interference. The plea of limitation was also not found to have been raised before the Tribunal as part of the recorded submissions, and therefore did not call for interference.

Conclusion: The finding on the nature of work was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.

---