Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.22 seconds)The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
State Bank Of Bikaner & Jaipur vs Nemi Chand Nalwaya on 1 March, 2011
In (2011) 4 Supreme Court cases 584, titled as State
Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur Vs. Nemi Chand Nalwaya, it has
been held in para no. 7 as :
Workmen Of Balmadies Estates vs Management Balmadies Estate And Ors on 18 January, 2008
This Tribunal has further relied upon (2008) 4 Supreme
Court cases, 517 titled as Workmen of Balmadies Estates Vs.
Management, Balmadies Estates and ors, in which it has been
held that the assessment of evidence in a domestic enquiry is not
I. D. No. 139/16 (Old No. 86/15) Sh. Mahender Kumar Vs. DTC Page No. 27 of 30
required to be made by applying the same yardstick as a civil court
could do when a lis is brought before it. The Evidence Act, 1872 is
not applicable to the proceeding in a domestic enquiry so far as the
domestic enquiries are concerned, though principles of fairness are
to apply. It is also fairly well settled that in a domestic enquiry guilt
may not be established beyond reasonable doubt and the proof of
misconduct would be sufficient. In a domestic enquiry all materials
which are logically probative including hearsay evidence can be
acted upon provided it has a reasonable nexus and credibility.
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 11A in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Workmen Of M/S Firestone Tyre & Rubber ... vs Firestone Tyre & Rubber Company on 13 February, 1976
21. Learned Counsel for the respondent cited two cases
Workmen Vs. Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India (P) Ltd and
South Indian Cashew Factories Workers' Union vs. Kerala State
Cashew Development Corporation Ltd to contend that the Labour
Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 11-A could have
come to a different conclusion. There is no quarrel with this
preposition of law. The Labour Court could have awarded lesser
punishment in the given facts and circumstances of the case. In a
case where two views are possible on the evidence on record,
then the Industrial Tribunal should be very slow in coming to a
conclusion other than the one arrived at by the domestic Tribunal
by substituting its opinion in place of the opinion of the
domestic tribunal".