Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.63 seconds)

Codialabail Press vs Monappa (K.) on 12 April, 1962

The only case, which mav be taken to lend support to it is Union of India v. Baburam, AIR 1962 All 52, but the view expressed by the learned single Judge in that case has not been accepted in Manager, Codialabail Press's case, AIR 1963 Mys 128, referred to above, and we also feel that some of the observations made therein run counter to the views expressed by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in A. V. D.'
Karnataka High Court Cites 39 - Cited by 31 - Full Document

K.P. Mushran vs B.C. Patil And Anr. on 24 August, 1951

It is doubtful if Respondent No. 2 before us viz. Payment of Wages Authority had carefully gone into this case, because it does not support the view expressed by it. On the contrary, it was clearly pointed out by their Lordships that the Authority set up under Section 15 of the Statute is a tribunal of limited jurisdiction, and its power to hear and determine disputes is limited by the provisions of the Act. The said Authority has also referred to K. P. Mushran v. B. C. Patil, AIR 1952 Bom 235, Payment of Wages Inspector M. B. Govt. v. Bramhodatta Bagrodia, AIR 1956 Madh B. 152, and Jay Gujarat Prakashan Ltd. v. Hari Prasad Hargovindas Pandya, AIR 1960 Guj 10, but none of these cases lend support to the conclusion arrived at by the Authority.
Bombay High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 46 - B P Sinha - Full Document
1