https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97691 Closure-related termination compensation was held to fall under the proviso to section 25FFF(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 where the undertaking was closed because of unavoidable circumstances beyond the employer's control, so compensation was restricted to three months' average pay. Industrial adjudication under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act was treated as a statutory proceeding in public interest and not as a claim against company assets, so section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 did not render the reference or award void for want of leave from the winding-up court. The award was also construed to allow increments from 1952 to 1957, while arrears of revised pay were confined to the earlier three years. en-us Mon, 23 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:53:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97691 Closure-related termination compensation was held to fall under the proviso to section 25FFF(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 where the undertaking was closed because of unavoidable circumstances beyond the employer's control, so compensation was restricted to three months' average pay. Industrial adjudication under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act was treated as a statutory proceeding in public interest and not as a claim against company assets, so section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 did not render the reference or award void for want of leave from the winding-up court. The award was also construed to allow increments from 1952 to 1957, while arrears of revised pay were confined to the earlier three years. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 23 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97691