Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.14 seconds)

Bank Of India vs T.S. Kelawala And Ors.Withs.U. Motors ... on 4 May, 1990

3. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, it cannot be said that the lockout was of long duration. The petitioner has made all efforts for resumption of work by the workmen earlier to 21st November 1977, but the workmen still persisted to their conditions. Thereafter, lock-out has been lifted, but still the workmen remained on illegal strike. The learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on two decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bank of India v. T.S. Kelawala and Ors., and in the case of Syndicate Bank & Am. v. K. Umesh Nayak, . In both these aforesaid decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that irrespective of the fact whether the strike is legal or illegal, the workmen are not entitled for wages for the strike period.
Supreme Court of India Cites 32 - Cited by 73 - P B Sawant - Full Document

Syndicate Bank & Anr vs K. Umesh Nayak & Ors on 13 September, 1994

3. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, it cannot be said that the lockout was of long duration. The petitioner has made all efforts for resumption of work by the workmen earlier to 21st November 1977, but the workmen still persisted to their conditions. Thereafter, lock-out has been lifted, but still the workmen remained on illegal strike. The learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on two decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bank of India v. T.S. Kelawala and Ors., and in the case of Syndicate Bank & Am. v. K. Umesh Nayak, . In both these aforesaid decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that irrespective of the fact whether the strike is legal or illegal, the workmen are not entitled for wages for the strike period.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 71 - P B Sawant - Full Document
1