Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 47 (0.52 seconds)Section 10 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Section 33 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Section 11 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Section 9A in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
The Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971
Section 17 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd. vs Parameswara Menon on 9 August, 1979
26. The expression 'incidental', therefore, under Section 10(4) while considering Section 33-A cannot include the power of granting any interim preventive relief. The jurisdiction to entertain the complaint is only on contravention of the provisions of Section 33-A. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in the case of Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd. v. Parameswara Menon (supra).
The Management Of Hotel Imperial, New ... vs Hotel Workers' Union on 21 May, 1959
22. The Apex Court has not concluded the issue though it was sought to be contended that it had so done. We have discussed the Judgments earlier, to point out that in Management Hotel Imperial (supra), the issue was left open as noted by the Apex Court itself in the Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. (supra).