Co Star - Judgment Search Results

Johnson Vs. Star

Court: US Supreme Court

Johnson v. Star - 287 U.S. 527 (1933) U.S. Supreme Court Johnson v. Star, 287 U.S. 527 (1933) Johnson v. Star No. 282 Argued December 13, 1932 Decided January

Blue Star Limited Vs. Blue Star Workers Union and Another

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR92; 1998(1)BomCR277; [1999(82)FLR925]

Lodha, J.1. Exception is taken by the petitioner Blue Star Limited to the direction given by the Industrial Court in its operative order dated 22-12-1995 while dismissing the complaint filed by respondent No. 1 Blue Star Workers

Blue Star Ltd. Vs. Blue Star Workers' Union and another

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1996)IILLJ1032bBom

ORDER1. Exception is taken by the Petitioner Blue Star Limited to the direction given by the Industrial Court in its operative order dated December 22, 1995 while dismissing the compliant filed by the Respondent No. 1

Blue Star Workers Union Vs. Blue Star Ltd. and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)IIILLJ477Bom

The petitioner union is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated January 8, 1993 passed by the Industrial Court, Thane in Complaint ULP No. 213 of 1984. The complaint was filed by the petitioner union against the

Aps Star Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. Star Textile Engineering Employe ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [1997(75)FLR906]; (1997)ILLJ1059Bom

ORDER1. It is common ground that no application has been made by the petitioners under Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act,

Blue Star Ltd. Vs. Blue Star Workers' Union and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1996(3)BomCR480; (1996)IILLJ1032Bom

G.R. Majithia, J.1. The petitioner, Blue Star Ltd., has challenged order dated June 14, 1993 passed in Complaint (ULP) No. 1419 of 1989 by the Industrial Court, Maharashtra, Bombay, in this writ petition under Article 226

Blue Star Workers Union Vs. Blue Star Ltd. and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [1991(61)FLR524]; (1992)ILLJ239Bom

returnable forthwith. Mr. Rele for Respondent No. 1, waives service. Respondent No. 2 is a formal party. Heard Counsel1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Union is challenging legality

Blue Star Ltd. Vs. Blue Star Workers Union and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR352; (1995)ILLJ138Bom

A.V. Savant, J. 1. Heard both the learned Counsel, Shri Cama for the petitioner and Shri Deshmukh for the first respondent-Union. 2. The petition seeks to challenge

Gold Star Co. Ltd. Vs. Gold Star Industries Ltd. and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)369; 57(1995)DLT658; 1995(33)DRJ188

Usha Mehra, J. (1) By this application M/s Gold Star Co. Ltd., plaintiff had sought an ex parte interlocutory order, inter alia, on the grounds that the plaintiff is

Sikka Star Satellites Vs. Star (India) Pvt. Ltd. and anr.

Court: SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

behalf of Sikka Star on 22.2.2002.Trouble started in the relationship between the parties from November, 1999 when a company namely Lucknow Entertainment Network Systems P.Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "LENS") was floated by Tony Sikka. Without the