Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.47 seconds)Indian Companies Act, 1913
Workmen Of Dimakuchi Tea Estate vs The Management Of Dimakuchitea Estate on 4 February, 1958
12. This proposition is also established by Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Management of Dimakuchi Tea Estate, . It was laid down there that the parties to the dispute must have a direct or substantial interest in it so that if a workman should raise a dispute, it must be connected with the concerned establishment or a part of it and it would not otherwise be a real dispute. The following observations of their Lordships are apposite in this context :
Narendra Kumar Sen And Ors. vs All India Industrial Disputes (Labour ... on 24 September, 1952
13. Their Lordships extracted with approval the following passage in Narendra Kumar Sen v. All India Industrial Disputes, (Labour Appellate) Tribunal, 55 Born LR 125 at p. 131 : (AIR 1953 Bom 335 at p. 327) :
Central Provinces Transport Services ... vs Raghunath Gopal Patwardhan on 6 November, 1956
In Central Provinces Transport Services Ltd. v. Raghunath Gopal, , this is what the Supreme Court observed :
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
M/S. New India Motors (P) Ltd.New Delhi vs K. T. Morris on 22 March, 1960
22. It was held by the Supreme Court in New India Motors (P) Ltd., New Delhi v. K. T. Morris, that an individual dispute could not become an industrial dispute at the instance of the aggrieved individual himself and that there should be a dispute between the employer on the one hand and his employees acting collectively on the other. This rule is contained in the following remarks of their Lordships :
The Bombay Union Of Journalists And ... vs The, Hindu', Bombay, And Another on 27 September, 1961
It was laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Bombay Union of Journalists v. Hindu Bombay, , that, in order that an individual dispute could be converted into an industrial dispute, the persons who seek to espouse the cause of the workmen must themselves be directly and substantially interested in the dispute and those who were not employees of the same employer could not be regarded as so interested. Their Lordships observed that the support by the Bombay Union of Working Journalists to the cause of the dismissed working journalist, who was a member of that Union, would not assist his claim so as to convert it into an industrial dispute. The principle underlying that ruling applies with full vigour to this case.
Associated Cement Companies, Ltd. vs Central Government Industrial ... on 7 January, 1959
17. We are re-inforced in this opinion of ours by Associated Cement Companies Ltd. v. Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, 1959-2 Lab LJ 639 at p. 644. It was observed there:
1