Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.94 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 11A in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
The Limitation Act, 1963
State Bank Of India vs R. K. Jain & Ors on 17 September, 1971
In this connection, reference may
be made to the decisions of this Court in Workmen v. Motipur Sugar Factory (P) Ltd., State
Bank of India v. R.K.Jain, Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. v. Ludh Budh Singh and
9
Firestone Tyre Co. case.
Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co vs Ludh Budh Singh on 11 January, 1972
The view
expressed in Delhi Cloth Mill case that before the proceedings are closed, an opportunity to
adduce evidence would be given if a suitable request for such opportunity is made by the
employer to the Tribunal, has been reiterated in Shankar Chakravarti case after observing
that on the question as to the stage as to when leave to adduce further evidence is to be
sought for, the decision of this Court in Cooper Engineering Ltd. has not overruled the
decision of this Court in Delhi Cloth Mill case. There is no dispute in the present case that
before the closure of the proceedings before the Tribunal, prayer was made by the employer
to lead evidence in support of the impugned order of dismissal. Hence, denial of the
opportunity to the employer to lead evidence before the Tribunal in support of the order of
dismissal cannot be justified."
Workmen Of Motipur Sugar Factory ... vs Motipur Sugar Factory on 30 March, 1965
The said judgement is now
holding the field wherein it has been held that all the disputes relating to the workmen to be raised
under the Industrial Disputes Act for effective adjudication which is beneficial not only for the
workmen concerned but also the employer. There is no doubt that the Industrial Disputes Act has
laid down extensive machinery for settlement and adjudication of the industrial disputes and the
parties will get opportunity to adduce evidence including additional evidence therein in respect of
their respective contentions as to be raised therein. Hence it is an alternative forum with effective
adjudicatory process to decide that question. Premier Automobiles Limited (Supra) has been
followed subsequently by the Apex Court in the case of Rajasthan State Road Transport
Corporation & Anr. -vs.- Krishna Kant & Ors. reported in 1999(5) SCC 75.
1