Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.48 seconds)
Documents citing Municipal Council, Sujanpur vs Surinder Kumar on 5 May, 2006

The Senior Regional Manager vs Sri.K.R.Vijayan on 13 March, 2020

Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Apex Court in Municipal Council, Sujanpur v. Surinder Kumar [2006 LLR 662], General Managaer, (OSD), Bengal Nagpur Cotton Mills, Rajnandgaon v. Bharat Lal and another [(2011) 1 SCC 635], Rajasthan State Ganganagar S. Mills Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan and another WP(C).No.677 OF 2006(E) -: 9 :- [2004-III-LLJ 832] and Haryana State Electronics Dev. Corn. v. Mamni [2006 LLR 667] in support of the contention that the burden to prove that the workmen had been employed directly by the Management was with the workmen themselves. It is contended that the Labour Court had proceeded on the basis that the contentions raised by the workmen had not been disproved by the Management. It is stated that there is no admission by the Management as recorded by the Labour Court in paragraph 14 of the award and that as such, the Labour Court ought to have found that the claim of the workmen was completely unsubstantiated. The learned Senior Counsel therefore contends that the award of the Labour Court is perverse and unreasonable and is also bad for the contradictory findings that it has rendered and is therefore completely unsustainable.
Kerala High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - A Sivaraman - Full Document

Toc H Institute Of Science And ... vs State Of Kerala on 4 October, 2024

11. The judgment in Municipal Council, Sujanpur v. Surinder Kumar [(2006) 5 SCC 173] was a case where the workmen could not establish non-completion of 240 days of work. In the said judgment, the Apex Court held that the burden of proof, having regard to the principles analogous to Section 106 of the Evidence Act that he was not gainfully WP(C) No.37442/2023 & connected cases :6: employed, was on the workman. The issue involved in the case was not regarding the gainful employment of the workmen. The issue involved was the burden of proof to establish non-completion of 240 days of work by the workmen. Therefore, the said judgment will not help the petitioner.
Kerala High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - N Nagaresh - Full Document

Toc H Institute Of Science And ... vs State Of Kerala on 4 October, 2024

11. The judgment in Municipal Council, Sujanpur v. Surinder Kumar [(2006) 5 SCC 173] was a case where the workmen could not establish non-completion of 240 days of work. In the said judgment, the Apex Court held that the burden of proof, having regard to the principles analogous to Section 106 of the Evidence Act that he was not gainfully WP(C) No.37442/2023 & connected cases :6: employed, was on the workman. The issue involved in the case was not regarding the gainful employment of the workmen. The issue involved was the burden of proof to establish non-completion of 240 days of work by the workmen. Therefore, the said judgment will not help the petitioner.
Kerala High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - N Nagaresh - Full Document

Toc H Institute Of Science And ... vs State Of Kerala on 4 October, 2024

11. The judgment in Municipal Council, Sujanpur v. Surinder Kumar [(2006) 5 SCC 173] was a case where the workmen could not establish non-completion of 240 days of work. In the said judgment, the Apex Court held that the burden of proof, having regard to the principles analogous to Section 106 of the Evidence Act that he was not gainfully WP(C) No.37442/2023 & connected cases :6: employed, was on the workman. The issue involved in the case was not regarding the gainful employment of the workmen. The issue involved was the burden of proof to establish non-completion of 240 days of work by the workmen. Therefore, the said judgment will not help the petitioner.
Kerala High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - N Nagaresh - Full Document
1