https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292925 A dispute remains referable under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act if the asserted right accrued while the industry was still operating, even if the undertaking was later closed; the relevant test is when the claim arose, not the date of reference. Correspondence proposing payment of 25% of sale profits did not create a binding contract because the offer was conditional on immediate withdrawal of the strike notice and there was no unconditional acceptance. Compensation could not be sustained on a retrenchment theory, since retrenchment presupposes continuation of business and does not cover termination on a bona fide closure under the unamended law. en-us Tue, 23 Oct 1956 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:34:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292925 A dispute remains referable under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act if the asserted right accrued while the industry was still operating, even if the undertaking was later closed; the relevant test is when the claim arose, not the date of reference. Correspondence proposing payment of 25% of sale profits did not create a binding contract because the offer was conditional on immediate withdrawal of the strike notice and there was no unconditional acceptance. Compensation could not be sustained on a retrenchment theory, since retrenchment presupposes continuation of business and does not cover termination on a bona fide closure under the unamended law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 23 Oct 1956 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292925