Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. H. Fillunger and Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Decided On : Sep-01-2008

Court : Mumbai

LAW: Section 75, the ESI Act', the ESI Act, Section 82, Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 100A, the ESI Act, Constitution Bench, Section 100A, Section 100A of the Code, the Amendment Act, the Constitution Bench, Section 104(1, Section 4, Section 104(1, the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 104(1, Section 104(1, Section 100A, the ESI Act, Chapter VI, Section 74 to Section 83, Section 74, Section 75, Section 76, Section 77, Section 195, the Limitation Act, the Industrial Disputes Act, Article 236(b, Constitution, Section 10F, the Companies Act, Section 10F, the Companies Act, Section 10F, the Civil Procedure Code, Section 10E of the Act, Section 10F of the Act, Section 10F of the Act, Section 397, Section 10F of the Act, Section 10F of the Act, Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure, Act 22 of 2002, Section 10F of the Act, Section 10F of the Act, Section 100A., the Companies Act, Section 10F, Section 100A of C.P.C.11, Article 236(b, Constitution, Section 75, the ESI Act, Section 82, the ESI Act, Section 100A, Section 100A, Section 100A, Section 30, Section 30, Section 82(2, the ESI Act, Section 30, Section 30, Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, the Amending Act, Section 100A, Section 30, Section 30, Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure, Letters Patent Appeal, Section 100A, Section 30, the ESI Act

PERSON: B.H. Marlapalle, Jaykar, Jaykar, LRs v. Andhra Bank Ltd., Rahul Sharad Awasthi, Ratnakar Trimbak Pandit, Naidu, Bhenoy G. Dembla....5, Sathappan, Sathappan, Gazette, Labour Law Practitioners', Bhenoy G. Dembla, Anr, Prem Kutir P. Ltd., Nariman, Garikapatti Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Choudhry, Bhenoy Dembla, Saraswati, Maniram Banewar

NORP: J.1

LOC: Single, Single, Single, Single, Single, Single, cases.- Notwithstanding, Single, Single, Single, Single

ORG: Court, First Appeal, the Employees' Insurance Court, the Employees' Insurance Court, ESI, Corporation, the Employees' Insurance Court, Court, Counsel for the Corporation, the Employees' Insurance Court, the Letters Patent Appeal, CPC, the Letters Patent Appeal, P.S.Sathappan (Dead, Ors, Court, LPA, CPC, Court, Kamal Kumar Dutta v. Ruby General Hospital Ltd., Rahul Awasthi (Supra, Court, CPC, the High Court, the Division Bench, the High Court, Andhra Pradesh High Court, Division Bench, Court, P.S. Sathappan, the Letters Patent Appeal, the High Court, The Supreme Court, Union of India, Mohindra Supply Co., Section 104, Lordships, Letters Patent Appeal, Sub-Clause, Section 104, the Letters Patent Appeal, ESI, the Letters Patent Appeal, the Division Bench?(c, the Letters Patent Appeal, State Government, Employees' Insurance Court, Court, the State Government, the Employees' Insurance Court, The State Government, Court, Court, the State Government, the Employees' Insurance Court, Civil Court, the Employees' Insurance Court, the Employees' Insurance Court, the State Government, Employees' Insurance Court, State, Court, State, the State Government, State, Court, Employees' Insurance Court, the State Government, Corporation, Employees' Insurance Court, a Civil Court, Civil Court, The Employees' Insurance Court, State, Employees' Insurance Court, the State Government, the Employees' Insurance Court, Civil, Employees' Insurance Court, the High Court, the High Court, Employees' Insurance Court, Sections 5, the State of Maharashtra, the State Government, the Industrial Courts / Tribunals, the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, the MRTU & PULP Act, the Employees' Insurance Courts, the Courts of Enquiry, Labour Courts, Industrial Courts (Recruitment, Appointment and Disciplinary Action) Rules, the Member - Industrial Court, the High Court, the Labour Court, the Selection Committee, Judicial, the High Court, the Industrial Court / Employees' Insurance Court, the Judicial Service, the Apex Court, State, Maharashtra, Court, Letters Patent Appeal, the Company Law Board, Court, Maharashtra Power Development Corporation Ltd., Dabhol Power Co., Ors, the Company Court, the Letters Patent Appeal, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the High Court, CLB, CLB, the High Court, the High Court, CLB, the Company Law Board, CLB, CLB, CLB, the High Court, the Calcutta High Court, Counsel, Court, the Federal Court, Parliament, Letters Patent, the High Court, Letters Patent, a High Court, the High Court, CLB, the High Court, CLB, the High Court, Parliament, Learned Counsel, House, the High Court, the Letters Patent, CLB, CLB, the High Court, the Company Law Board, CLB, the High Court, Parliament, Employees' Insurance Court, Judicial, the Employees' Insurance Court, Court, Letters Patent Appeal, the Division Bench, the High Court, Division, Court, Gangwani & Co., Gangwani & Co., the Appellate Court, The High Court, the High Court, Letters Patent, the High Court, the High Court, Bombay, the Workmen's Compensation, CPC, the Letters Patent Appeal, Gangawani & Co., Letters Patent Appeal

CARDINAL: 22/2/2005, 696, 17/8/1993, 696, 696, 696, 2004(5)BomCR50, 7, 613.4, 1962]3SCR497, 1, 2, 1, 2, one, two, 1/7/2002?(b, two, two, more than one, 3, 1, 2, 82, 2, 1974).(2, 1, 12, less than five, less than ten, 2004(2)BomCR280, 21, 23, 398, 398, 1, 398, 31, 31, 397, 398, 398, one, 1, 398, two, 398, 398, 398, 3, 1923.The, 1

ORDINAL: First, First, First, first, second, second

FAC: 4/5/2001

DATE: 1993, 1948, 27/11/1976, 2001, 22/2/2005, 2001, 1/7/2002, 2001, 1/7/2002, 2006, 2002, five years', a period of, three years, 78, 79,, 81, 1973, 1963, 36 of 1963, 1947, 1946, 1971, 1999, less than 35 years of age, more than 50 years of age, 1956, 1956, 22, 1991, Sections 10E, 10F, filed.10, 1st July, 2002, 1st July, 2002, 2001, 1976, 1/7/2002

GPE: Counsel, Counsel, C.P.C., C.P.C., Judges, Kamal, Single, Kamal, C.P.C.

TIME: 22/2/2005 i.e.

PRODUCT: the Full Bench, The Full Bench, Sections 397, Sections 397, Sections 397, Sections 397, the Full Bench, the Full Bench

EVENT: the Scheme of Section 82, the Workmen's Compensation Act, the Workmen's Compensation Act, the Workmen's Compensation Act, the Workmen's Compensation Act, the Workmen's Compensation Act, Clause 15, the Workmen's Compensation Act, the Workmen's Compensation Act

QUANTITY: sixty days.(4

MONEY: 1998)ILLJ868SC .9

WORK_OF_ART: Kamal Kumar Datta