Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 25 (0.28 seconds)
The Amravati Zilla Mahila Sahakari Bank ... vs The Assistant Provident Fund ... on 25 April, 2019 cites

The Pachora Peoples' Co-Op. Bank Ltd vs The Employees Provident Fund on 7 February, 2014

On this basis, it was contended that even if the judgments in the case of Pachora Peoples' Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. Employees Provident Fund Organization (supra) were confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nashik Merchant Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II (supra), such judgments were on a concession given by the counsel agreeing to remand of the matters before the Authorities under the Act of 1952 and that being in ignorance of the said position of law regarding binding effect of award under section 18(3)(d) of the Act of 1947, the judgments in the case of Pachora Peoples' Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. Employees Provident Fund Organization (supra) were per incuriam and not binding on this Court. As noted above, alternatively, it was submitted that this aspect was required to be referred to a Full Bench of this Court.
Bombay High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 26 - R V Ghuge - Full Document

Nashik Merchant Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs The Regional Provident Fund ... on 5 October, 2017

On this basis, it was contended that even if the judgments in the case of Pachora Peoples' Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. Employees Provident Fund Organization (supra) were confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nashik Merchant Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II (supra), such judgments were on a concession given by the counsel agreeing to remand of the matters before the Authorities under the Act of 1952 and that being in ignorance of the said position of law regarding binding effect of award under section 18(3)(d) of the Act of 1947, the judgments in the case of Pachora Peoples' Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. Employees Provident Fund Organization (supra) were per incuriam and not binding on this Court. As noted above, alternatively, it was submitted that this aspect was required to be referred to a Full Bench of this Court.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 3 - Cited by 19 - Full Document

Indian Banks Association vs Workmen Of Syndicate Bank And Ors on 13 February, 2001

A perusal of the judgments of the Division Bench of this Court in the writ petition and review application in the case of Pachora Peoples' Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. Employees Provident Fund Organization (supra) shows that KHUNTE ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2019 05:59:26 ::: WPs-5154.16+16-Judgment 39/56 copious reference and quotations have been made by the Division Bench of this Court from the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Banks Association v. The Workmen of Syndicate Bank and others (supra), whereby the modified award of the Industrial Tribunal at Hyderabad was confirmed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 89 - S N Variava - Full Document

Punjab National Bank And Ors vs Manjeet Singh And Anr on 29 September, 2006

17. But, a perusal of para 17 of the judgment in the case of Punjab National Bank and Ors. v. Manjeet Singh and Anr.(supra) quoted above, shows that the Hon'ble Supreme Court while reiterating binding nature of the award under the aforesaid provisions, has observed that the principles of natural justice would still apply to a situation where the factual position or legal implication arising is disputed and not where it is not in dispute or cannot be disputed. It is further held that if only one conclusion was possible, a writ would not issue only because there was a KHUNTE ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2019 05:59:26 ::: WPs-5154.16+16-Judgment 27/56 violation of principles of natural justice. These observations in the very same judgment are relevant for the present case. This is because the present case concerns notices issued by Authorities under the provisions of the Act of 1952 regarding applicability of the provisions of the said Act and hence, contributions liable to be paid by the banks as well as the collection agents, in the respective facts of the individual cases. This necessarily encompasses the question of power of the Authorities under the provisions of the Act of 1952 to take steps as are necessary to fulfill the object of the Act of 1952.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 307 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Dir. Of Settlements, A.P. & Ors vs M.R. Apparao & Anr on 20 March, 2002

Thus, the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Settlements, A.P. v. M.R.Apparao (supra) applies squarely to the present case and the learned counsel appearing for the banks were not justified in contending that the said directions and observations given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nashik Merchant Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II (supra) were given on a concession of the KHUNTE ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2019 05:59:26 ::: WPs-5154.16+16-Judgment 38/56 counsel appearing for the banks in those cases.
Supreme Court of India Cites 43 - Cited by 489 - Full Document

Yeshwant Sahakari Kamgar Bank Ltd. (Not ... vs The Assistant Provident Fund Commr. ... on 11 December, 2006

Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner and another, is partly allowed. The impugned order passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Akola as also the impugned order passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal are quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Akola for holding fresh enquiry under section 7-A of the Act of 1952 as per the above quoted parameters laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in review in the case of Pachora Peoples' Co- op. Bank Ltd. v. Employees Provident Fund Organization (supra), quoted above.
Bombay High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 22 - R M Khandeparkar - Full Document
1   2 3 Next