1960 (3) TMI 53

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r Nath and P. L. Vohra, for the appellant. Janardan Sharma, for the respondent. JUDGMENT Wanchoo, J. This is an appeal by special leave in an industrial matter. The appellant is a company carrying on the manufacture of textiles. The respondent Kushal Bhan was in the employ of the company as a peon. It appears that the cycle of Ram Chandra, Head Clerk of the Folding Department was stole....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iry. The respondent appeared before the enquiry committed but stated that as the case was pending against him, he did not want to produce any defence till the matter was decided by the court. He further stated that he did not want to take part in the enquiry and was not prepared to give any answers to questions put to him. When questions were put to him at the enquiry he refused to answer them and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The main contention on behalf of the appellant-company is that the company was not bound to wait for the result of the trial in the criminal court and that it could, and did, hold a fair enquiry against the respondent, and if the respondent refused to participate in it and left the place where the enquiry was being held, the company could do no more than to complete it and come to such conclu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t the employee. In Shri Bimal Kanta Mukherjee v. Messrs. Newsman's Printing Works ((1956) L.A.C. 188), this was the view taken by the Labour Appellant Tribunal. We may, however, add that if the case is of a grave nature or involves questions of fact or law, which are not simple, it would be advisable for the employer to await the decision of the trial court, so that the defence of the employee....