Industrial Dispute - Judgment Search Results

Ganesh Lal Vs. the Judge, Industrial Disputes Tribunal and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: [2007(113)FLR780]; RLW2007(2)Raj1222

workman therein in violation of the U.P. Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959, held that since the provisions of the U.P. Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 had not been complied with, instead and in place of issuing a direction for reinstatement of

Poonam Chand Panchariya Vs. the Judge, Industrial Disputes Tribunal an ...

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 2009(2)WLN54

cannot answer an award made by appropriate Government under Section 10 (1) (c) in the name of no industrial dispute award. The reference proceedings dos not abate even on the death of workman what to talk of absence … the basis of material available on record. The Court or the Tribunal with a view to settle the industrial dispute keeping in mind the sense of doing complete justice to the parties concerned, may obtain additional material, if

Anil Kumar Vs. Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute Tribunal

Court: Punjab and Haryana

AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.9434 of 2013 Date of Decision:02. 05.2013 Anil Kumar ....Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Industrial Dispute Tribunal cum labour Court, Ludhiana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA Present: Mr.Hitesh Pandit, Advocate, … of judgment of this Court. After the workman Anil Kumar was relieved on feeling aggrieved he raised an industrial dispute which was referred in 2002 for industrial adjudication by the appropriate Government. The issue framed by the appropriate

Roche Anglo-french Employees' Union, Bombay Vs. Conciliation Officer, ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [1985(51)FLR244]; (1987)IILLJ169Bom; 1986MhLJ308

against the respondent - company in enforcement of its obligation under the provisions of Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The facts which are indeed not in dispute and in so far as they are

Narendra Kumar Sen and ors. Vs. All India Industrial Disputes (Labour ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR1953Bom325; (1953)55BOMLR125; ILR1954Bom260; (1953)IILLJ6Bom

on behalf of themselves and all other workmen employed by the second respondent company. This union raised an industrial dispute in 1946. It was referred to the Industrial Tribunal and the Tribunal which consisted of Mr. Kamerkar gave … to adjudicate flows from Section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947. It is only when an Industrial dispute has been referred to a Tribunal that the Tribunal has the authority to adjudicate upon it. Therefore, the