Karnataka Court July 2001 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
J.B. Micheal D'Souza Vs. Appellate Authority under Payment of Gratuity ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2001
Reported in: [2002(92)FLR1200]; ILR2002KAR1396; (2001)IILLJ1450Kant
ORDERThe Court1. This writ petition is by the ex-employee of the third respondent-Bank challenging the order of the Appellate Authority i.e., the first respondent under which the order of the second respondent has been set aside.2. The facts in this case are as follows.-The third respondent-Bank issued a notice dated 30-6-1998 intimating that the gratuity payable to him has been forfeited under Section-4(6)(a) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short, 'Act'). As against this order the petitioner filed a petition under Section 7 of the Act claiming payment of gratuity. The said application was allowed by the Controlling Authority directing the third respondent-Bank to pay Rs. 84,561 to the petitioner. In the said order the Controlling Authority has not awarded any interest as required under Section 7(3)(a) of the Act. As against the order of the Controlling Authority directing the third respondent to pay the gratuity, the third respondent preferred an appeal before the Appellate ...
Employees' State Insurance Corporation, Bangalore Vs. Nutan Ayurvedic ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2001
Reported in: [2001(91)FLR873]; ILR2001KAR4265; 2001(6)KarLJ145
The Court1. The respondent 1 is the applicant. It is private limited company carrying on business in sale and manufacture of ayurvedic medicines. The normal strength of the employees of the applicant establishment is about 12 employees. It is also stated that the respondent who is the appellant was in error in having applied the provisions of the Act with effect from 1983 on the presumption that the employment strength of establishment was more than 20 and it was a factory within the meaning of Section 2(12) of the Act as defined under the Employees' State Insurance Act. The applicant did not use the power in the manufacture of its goods. The State Government by virtue of its powers vested in it made the Employees' State Insurance law applicable to the establishment of the applicant with effect from 1-2-1987, The applicant istherefore coming under the Act with effect from that date. The appellant herein, without conducting any enquiry asked the applicant to pay a sum of Rs. 28,133/- as...
United India Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore Vs. Sridhargadde Bas ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ875; [2002(92)FLR101]; ILR2001KAR3922; 2002(1)KarLJ159
The Court 1. This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the award in WC/SR. 340 of 1997, dated 16-7-1988 on the file of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Bellary.2. In brief the facts that led to the filing of this appeal are as under:The first respondent was the petitioner before the Workmen's Compensation Court. He filed an application claiming compensation alleging that he sustained injuries in a motor accident while working as a loader in the lorry belonging to the second respondent herein and the said lorry met with an accident on 24-6-1997 and the first respondent sustained injuries. Therefore, according to him he is entitled for compensation towards permanent disability.3. This was contested by the second respondent herein who was the employer contending that the petitioner-claimant was not his employee and he was not paying any wages to him. In other words employer denied the relationship of employer and employee. The appellant herein denied its liability ...
United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Sridharagadde Basappa and a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2001
Reported in: II(2002)ACC614
Manjula Chellur, J.1. This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the award in WC/SR.340/97 dated 16.7.1988 on the file of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Bellary.2. In brief the facts that led to the filing of this appeal are as under:The first respondent was the petitioner before the W.C. Court. He filed an application claiming compensation alleging that he sustained injuries in a motor accident while working as a loader in the lorry belonging to the second respondent herein and the said lorry met with an accident on 24.6.1997 and the first respondent sustained injuries. Therefore, according to him he is entitled for compensation towards permanent disability.3. This was contested by the second respondent herein who was the employer contending that the petitioner-claimant was not his employee and he was not paying any wages to him. In other words employer denied the relationship of employer and employee. The appellant herein denied its liability to pay compensat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›