Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.20 seconds)Management Of Monghyr Factory Of Itc ... vs The Presiding Officer, Labour Court ... on 24 July, 1978
Lastly, the case M/s Indian Aluminium Co.
Ltd., vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi
and another, (supra) relied on by ARW pertains to Patna
High Court and it has persuasive value on the court situated
in territory of Delhi whereas cases UCO Bank vs. The
Presiding Officer & Another, (supra) and M/s Bharat
Iron Works vs. Bhagubhai Balubhai Patel and ors.
(supra) of Delhi High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court are
binding on this court.
Uco Bank vs Presiding Officer & Another on 30 August, 1999
Lastly, the case M/s Indian Aluminium Co.
Ltd., vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi
and another, (supra) relied on by ARW pertains to Patna
High Court and it has persuasive value on the court situated
in territory of Delhi whereas cases UCO Bank vs. The
Presiding Officer & Another, (supra) and M/s Bharat
Iron Works vs. Bhagubhai Balubhai Patel and ors.
(supra) of Delhi High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court are
binding on this court.
Bharat Iron Works vs Bhagubhai Balubhai Patel & Ors on 10 October, 1975
Lastly, the case M/s Indian Aluminium Co.
Ltd., vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi
and another, (supra) relied on by ARW pertains to Patna
High Court and it has persuasive value on the court situated
in territory of Delhi whereas cases UCO Bank vs. The
Presiding Officer & Another, (supra) and M/s Bharat
Iron Works vs. Bhagubhai Balubhai Patel and ors.
(supra) of Delhi High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court are
binding on this court.
Mohan Meakin Breweries Ltd vs Commissioner Of Excise, Bihar & Ors on 15 April, 1986
In Mohan Meakin
Breweries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Excise, Bihar and
others the Supreme Court held that though in the
proviso to rule 147 of the Rules framed under the Bihar
and Orissa Excise Act, 1915, the expression used was 'an
excisable articles that expression did not embrace
foreign liquor not imported under the bond because the
main part of the rule, to which the proviso was appended
applied only to foreign liquor imported under the bond.
The proviso to Section 11-A of the Act will, therefore,
come into play only when the wider powers of an
appellate authority conferred on a Tribunal by Section
11-A are sought to be exercised by the Tribunal for
ascertaining the correctness or otherwise of the finding
in the domestic enquiry. In matters not covered by the
main Section, the proviso would not be attracted.
The Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915
M/S Karuna Aluminium vs Presiding Officer Labour Court-Iii ... on 19 July, 2010
10. After considering the arguments of Ld. Authorized
representative of workman and Ld. Counsel for management,
and the principles of law laid down in above mentioned case, I
am of the view that the case of M/s Indian Aluminium vs.
The Presiding Officer (supra) relied on by ARW will not
provide any benefit to the workman for the reasons, firstly,
that facts of the present case and that case are different.
1