Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (1.63 seconds)Section 46 in The Factories Act, 1948 [Entire Act]
Section 46 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 1956
Indian Petrochemicals Corporation ... vs Shramik Sena And Ors on 4 August, 1999
This Court in Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd.
& Anr. vs. Shramik Sena & Ors., 1999(6) SCC 439, referred
to the decisions in Parimal Chandra Rahas case, Reserve
Bank of India vs. Workmen, 1996 (3) SCC 267, and M.M.R.Khan
vs. Union of India, 1990 Supp. SCC 191, and held that the
workmen of a statutory canteen, as in the present case,
would be workmen of an establishment for the purposes of the
Act only and not for other purposes. Thereafter, this Court
further examined whether the material on record would show
that the workmen are employees of the management for all
purposes and adopted some of the tests as follows:
Employee In Relation To Themanagement ... vs Their Workmen on 28 February, 1996
This Court in Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd.
& Anr. vs. Shramik Sena & Ors., 1999(6) SCC 439, referred
to the decisions in Parimal Chandra Rahas case, Reserve
Bank of India vs. Workmen, 1996 (3) SCC 267, and M.M.R.Khan
vs. Union of India, 1990 Supp. SCC 191, and held that the
workmen of a statutory canteen, as in the present case,
would be workmen of an establishment for the purposes of the
Act only and not for other purposes. Thereafter, this Court
further examined whether the material on record would show
that the workmen are employees of the management for all
purposes and adopted some of the tests as follows:
M.M.R. Khan And Ors. Etc vs Union Of India And Ors. Etc on 27 February, 1990
This Court in Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd.
& Anr. vs. Shramik Sena & Ors., 1999(6) SCC 439, referred
to the decisions in Parimal Chandra Rahas case, Reserve
Bank of India vs. Workmen, 1996 (3) SCC 267, and M.M.R.Khan
vs. Union of India, 1990 Supp. SCC 191, and held that the
workmen of a statutory canteen, as in the present case,
would be workmen of an establishment for the purposes of the
Act only and not for other purposes. Thereafter, this Court
further examined whether the material on record would show
that the workmen are employees of the management for all
purposes and adopted some of the tests as follows:
Parimal Chandra Raha & Ors vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India & ... on 29 March, 1995
On behalf of the appellant, contention was raised that
no writ would lie against the appellant inasmuch as the
appellant is a company, which is not an authority or a
person against whom a writ would lie. It was submitted that
they do not discharge any public duty and hence the writ
cannot be issued. On the merits of the matter, the
appellant disputed various questions of fact and urged that
the decision of this Court in Parimal Chandra Raha vs. Life
Insurance Corporation of India, 1995 Supp. (2) SCC 611,
would not be applicable to the appellant in the facts and
circumstances of the case.