Mumbai Court August 1993 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.
K.R. Bhagat Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR658]
1. The petitioner in this case is a workman who is aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of Labour, Bombay, refusing to make a reference of the dispute to the Labour Court under section 10(1) read with section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('the Act') 2. The petitioner is a workman. He was working with the Respondent No. 3 as a Turner for a period of about 9 years. He raised an industrial dispute on the ground that this services were terminated by the management. He served a demand for his reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of services with effect from the date of the alleged termination i.e. 31.7.1989 on 5th August, 1989. As the management did not concede to his demand, he approached the Conciliation Officer under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, who took up the conciliation proceedings. 3. The case of the petitioner was that he was working with the Respondent No. 3 for more than 9 years. After he joined the National Labour Union, he was threatened b...
Smt. Motibai Sarvotham Pai Cano W/O Sarvotham Pai Cano and ors. Vs. Sm ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1993
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR628
G.D. Kamat, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment and appellate decree dated 9th March, 1990, made in First Civil Appeal No.100/88, by a learned Single Judge of this Court. The First Civil Appeal No.100/88 had arisen out of a judgment and decree dated 4th August, 1988, made in Regular Civil Suit No.111/68-c by the Civil Court at Margao.2. To appreciate the controversy between the parties and in the appeal reference is needed to the background of the litigation. Antonio Joaquim Mota was the owner of a property bearing matriz No.512 consisting of a house. Upon his death, inventory proceedings were launched and in the final order that emerged in those proceedings, his widow Ema Elvira Issura Rangel was allotted 5/8ths share and his sons Filomeno and Victor and daughter Maria Elsa do perpetuo Socorro Mota were allotted 1/8th share each. The third son Jose Mario Bailon Mota, for short `Jose Mari, was left out insofar as this house property is concerned. During her...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›