Sandeep Chopra v. M/S. Fashionite Impex Pvt. Ltd.

1. Counsel for the appellant, on instructions from the appellant who is present in person, confines the relief in this appeal as also in the suit to the grant of 26 days salary i.e from 1.8.2008 to 26.8.2008, and for which period the appellant worked with the respondent/defendant. It is also prayed that the costs imposed by the first appellate court against the appellant be waived especially because appellant is entitled to the relief of grant of salary of 26 days. 2014:DHC:1121

2. The facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs.1,28,067/- against the respondent/defendant/employer. This amount of Rs.1,28,067/- included in it various amounts towards agony caused by illegal termination i.e one month notice pay salary as also salary of 26 days for which period the appellant/plaintiff had worked with the respondent/defendant and so on.

3. Trial Court partly decreed the suit for amount of Rs.29,450/- ie 26 days salary as also one month’s notice pay but the appeal against the judgment of the trial court by the respondent/defendant was allowed and the first appellate court while allowing the appeal imposed costs of Rs.50,000/upon the appellant/plaintiff herein.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has taken me through para 2 (on merits) of the written statement filed by the respondent/defendant, wherein the respondent/employer admitted that the appellant had worked for 26 days ie from 1.8.2008 to 26.8.2008. Attention of this Court is also invited by the appellant to paras 8 and 9 of the judgment of the trial court that this para 2 of the written statement is noted for granting of recovery of amount of salary for 26 days of work by the appellant/plaintiff/employee with the respondent/employer/defendant.

5. For the purpose of this second appeal, the following substantial questions of law are framed:- “(i) Whether the first appellate court committed a clear and grave error of law in overlooking the admission of liability to pay 26 days salary as made in para 2 of the written statement?

(ii) When the appellant/plaintiff had at least a claim for this salary of 26 days, could the appellate court have imposed heavy costs of Rs.50,000/-on the appellant?”

6. In my opinion, the questions of law have to be answered in favour of the appellant as the plaintiff has restricted his claim to the claim of salary of 26 days and for which period he worked with the respondent/defendant and a fact which is admitted in the written statement and so duly noted by the trial court in para 9 of its judgment. In law, for the period of work, an employee is always entitled to salary. Therefore, it is held that suit of the appellant/plaintiff is decreed for the salary of 26 days and this figure is rounded off to a sum of Rs.14,000/-. Since the appellant/plaintiff’s suit is being partly decreed, costs cannot be imposed against a successful appellant/plaintiff and therefore costs of Rs.50,000/awarded against the appellant/plaintiff by the appellate court are set aside.

7. In view of the above, this Regular Second Appeal is allowed and the suit of the appellant/plaintiff will stand decreed for an amount of Rs.14,000/- alongwith interest @ 7 ½% per annum simple pendente lite and future till payment. Parties are left to bear their own costs.

FEBRUARY 28, 2014 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. Ne