Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the industrial disputes act 1947 Year: 1962 Page 1 of about 186 results (0.077 seconds)

Aug 25 1962 (HC)

Savatram Ramprasad Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Baliram Ukandaji and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-25-1962

Reported in : AIR1963Bom189; (1963)65BOMLR91; ILR1963Bom594; (1963)ILLJ400Bom

..... constitution. in support of the petitions two points were raised and argued at length:(1) whether the industrial disputes act, 1947 (act xiv of 1947) is applicable to the textile industry in vidarbha region in view of the local act, viz., the c. p. and berar industrial disputes settlement act, 1947, being in operation in this region. (2) whether the labour court appointed under section 7 of ..... the operation of the c. p. and berar industrial disputes settlement act, 1947, in this region. we therefore hold that the provisions of the central industrial disputes act, 1947. are available to the respondents workers and that there is no repugnancy between any provisions of the c. p. and berar industrial disputes settlement ad and the industrial disputes act, 1947, as amended by parliament so far as the questions ..... certain monetary benefits are not given.38. the respondents have also urged that liberal construction ought to be put in interpreting provisions of chapter va of the industrial disputes act, 1947. the statute is designed to relieve hardship and in this connection our attention is invited to the decision of their lordships of the supreme court in associated ..... and jurisdiction of the labour court to adjudicate on the merits of the claim in the instant case. in this connection it is to be observed that the industrial disputes act. 1947, until it was amended in 1953 and 1956, did not provide any machinery or did not constitute any forum for enforcement of individual right of a workman .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 1962 (HC)

Ballarpur Collieries Company Vs. State Industrial Court

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-08-1962

Reported in : (1963)65BOMLR556; 1963MPLJ891

..... as a branch of this argument, it also contended that the petitioner-company having been governed by the shops and establishments act was by necessary implication excluded from the operation of either the central provinces and berar industrial disputes settlement act, 1947, or the industrial disputes act, 1947, passed by the state or dominion legislatures respectively. 17. the petitioner-company examined the personnel officer, the enquiry officer, ..... be made is the law by which the relations between the employer and the employee are governed in a given case and that law in this case is the industrial disputes act, 1947. it is now well-settled that even if an employer is entitled to dismiss an employee for misconduct, it has to be preceded by a proper enquiry and ..... 61. the applicant complained that the termination of services in this manner was contrary to law and the provisions of the industrial disputes act, 1947, s. 25f, and also contrary to the provisions of the central provinces and berar industrial disputes settlement act, 1947. the relief claimed in this application was that respondent 3 should be paid compensation by way of retrenchment compensation and also ..... not provide for the manner in which an order of dismissal may be brought about in respect of an employee whose conditions of service are governed by the industrial disputes act, 1947. even though a dismissal may be justified, it has to be brought about by the process known to law or the conditions of service by which the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 1962 (HC)

Central Distillery and Chemical Works Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-25-1962

Reported in : AIR1964All156

..... meant the original u. p. industrial disputes act, 1947 (act no. xxviii of 1947) and not the amended one. inasmuch as section 4-e was brought in act no. xxviii of 1947 by means of act no. 1 of 1957 the words 'in section 4-e of the u. p. industrial disputes act, '1947' occurring in section 2 of act no. xxlll of 1957 obviously mean the u. p. industrial disputes act, 1947, as amended and inclusive of ..... for the maintenance of public order and for maintaining employment;now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 3, 4 and 8 of the u. p. industrial disputes act, 1947 (u. p. act no. 28 of 1947) and in pursuance of the provisions of clause 11 of g.o. no. u-464 (ll)/xxxvi-b-257/ (lj/1954, dated july 14, 1954, as amended ..... uttar pradesh, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b), (c) and (g) of section 3 and sections. 6-a and 8 of the u. p. industrial disputes act, 1947 (u. p. act no. 28 of 1947), and in supersession of government order no. 615(ll)/xviii-7(ll)1951, dated march 15, 1951, is pleased to make the following order and to direct, with ..... the first point, admittedly, the present case is governed by the order notified by the state government dated 14th july, 1954 read with the provisions of the industrial disputes act, 1947 (u. p. act no. 28 of 1947. the opening words of the notification read as follows:'whereas it is necessary in the opinion of the state government so to do for securing the public safety .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 1962 (HC)

Ramkrishna Ramnath Bidi Manufacturing, Kamptee Vs. the Presiding Offic ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-25-1962

Reported in : AIR1963Bom201; (1963)65BOMLR109; [1963(6)FLR175]; ILR1962Bom714; 1963MhLJ182

..... the same time, over-stale claims are not to be encouraged. 20. the question now is whether this principle applies to the labour courts constituted under section 7 of the industrial disputes act, 1947. on this point the respondent-worker contends that all that the labour court is required to do under section 33c(2) is to determine by computation in terms of money ..... (2). it is, therefore, evident that by the constitution of labour courts to deal with the determination of benefits receivable by a workman, inter alia, under chapter va of the industrial disputes act, 1947, the jurisdiction of a civil court, if any, was clearly barred by implication. therefore, it is no longer open to contend after the amendment of 1956 that the compensation payable ..... great length. it is an admitted fact that no period of limitation is prescribed for an application to be made before the labour court under section 330(2) of the industrial disputes act, 1947. it was, therefore, contended for respondent no. 2 that since the legislature in its wisdom has not thought it necessary to prescribe a period of limitation for such an application ..... no. 2, were re-employed. 3. on 7-3-1961 respondent no. 2 filed an application before respondent no. 1, purporting to be one under section 33c(2) of the industrial disputes act, 1947. respondent no. 2 alleged that as a consequence of the closure of the factory, the workers including herself were retrenched and hence she was entitled to retrenchment compensation under chapter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 1962 (HC)

Ramkrishan Ramnath Bidi Manufacturing, Kamptee Vs. Labour Court, Nagpu ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-25-1962

Reported in : (1963)ILLJ417Bom

..... it is, therefore, evident that with the constitution of labour courts to deal with the determination of benefits receivable by a workman, inter alia, under chap. v-a of the industrial disputes act, 1947, the jurisdiction of a civil court, if any, was clearly barred by implication. therefore, it is no longer open to contend after the amendment of 1956 that the compensation payable ..... at great length. it is an admitted fact that no period of limitation is prescribed for an application to be made before the labour court under s. 33c(2) of industrial disputes act, 1947. it was, therefore, contended for respondent 2 that since the legislature in its wisdom has not thought it necessary to prescribe a period of limitation for such an application ..... raised. the first point is that the labour court was not entitled to entertain an application for the computation of a non-monetary benefit under s. 33c(2) of the industrial disputes act 1947. the second point is of limitation. 7. as regards the first point, the case is now concluded by a number of decisions : see shree amarsinhji mills, ltd. v. nagrashna : ..... employees, including respondent 2, were reemployed. 3. on 7 march, 1961, respondent 2 filed an application before respondent 1 purporting to be one under s. 33c(2) of the industrial disputes act, 1947. respondent 2 alleged that as a consequence of the closure of the factory, the workers including herself were retrenched and hence she was entitled to retrenchment compensation under chap. v .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 1962 (SC)

Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd., Meerut Vs. Lakshmichand and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-25-1962

Reported in : AIR1963SC677; [1965(10)FLR179]; (1963)ILLJ524SC; [1963]Supp1SCR242

..... the state. it may be pertinent to note that provisions similar to clause 29 of the order issued under the u.p. industrial disputes act, 1947, are to be found in s. 33 of the industrial disputes act, 1947. by virtue of s. 33 an employer during the pendency of any conciliation proceeding before a conciliation officer or a board or ..... law.' 25. conciliation officer functioning under clause 29 is not an industrial tribunal constituted under the industrial disputes act, 1947, his authority being derived from the appointment made by the state of uttar pradesh under the u.p. industrial disputes act, 1947. nor is any provision made in the u.p. industrial disputes act, 1947, or orders made thereunder for an appeal to any similar authority against ..... findings of the board of court. under the order promulgated in 1948, therefore, the conciliation board was invested with authority analogous to that of an industrial tribunal under the industrial disputes act, 1947. but the power to sanction discharge or dismissal of workmen during the continuance of the enquiry was vested exclusively in the conciliation officer, irrespective of ..... ignored the principles settled by this court and the labour appellate tribunal in cases dealing with applications for granting permission to discharge employees under s. 33 of the industrial disputes act, 1947. in the appeal against the order of the labour appellate tribunal, it is submitted that the conciliation officer was an 'authority' within the meaning of s. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 1962 (SC)

Kirloskar Oil Engines Vs. Hanmant Laxman Bibawe

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-31-1962

Reported in : [1962(5)FLR226]; (1963)ILLJ126SC; 1963MhLJ129(SC); [1963]3SCR514

..... gajendragadkar, j.1. the respondent bibawe made an application to the industrial tribunal at bombay under s. 33-a of the industrial disputes act, 1947. he alleged that he had been employed by the appellant m/s. kirloskar oil engines, limited, as a watchman since july 21, ..... that the respondent cannot be said to be an employee of the appellant; and so, he cannot claim to be an industrial employee and as such, a workman concerned in the above industrial dispute pending adjudication at the relevant time. 11. the result is that the appeal must be allowed the order passed by the ..... effect from that date. the respondent urged that at the time when this order of discharge was orally served on him, an industrial dispute was pending between the appellant and its employees before an industrial tribunal and as such the respondent could not be discharged by the appellant without obtaining the approval of the ..... was whether or not the respondent was the appellant's employee and as such could be said to be a workman concerned in the dispute which was pending industrial adjudication at the time of his discharge. the tribunal set forth the rival contention of the parties on this point and observed that it ..... to accept the view taken by the tribunal that the respondent was an employee of the appellant, that he was an industrial employee and therefore he was a workman concerned in the dispute which was pending adjudication on the date of his discharge. 7. when we turn to the oral evidence, the position .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 1962 (HC)

Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, And ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-22-1962

Reported in : AIR1964AP56

..... 1958 and retrenchment compensation also paid, there was no jural relationship of employer and employee between the management and the workmen and consequently there was no industrial dispute within the terms of the industrial disputes act, 1947 and therefore the reference was incompetent. (ii) the management was not bound to re-employ them on the same conditions as to wages as were ..... . the commissioner of labour reported the matter to the state government and the latter issued a notification under section 10(1) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 (hereafter to be referred to as the act) referring the dispute in the following terms to the labour court, guntur.'how far the employers of the indian hume pipe company, ramavarappadu branch are justified ..... concept of re-employment, there is no warrant for limiting the scope of section 25h to the mere taking back the retrenched workmen. the object of the industrial disputes act being to establish industrial peace and harmonious relations between labour and capital, it should be liberally construed. a construction which would aid the policy underlying the statute, should be adopted ..... the relationship of employer and employed has ceased by reasonof the retrenchment in view of section 25h read with section 2(k) of the act. section 2(k) runs as follows:'industrial dispute' means any dispute or difference between the employers and employers o; between employers and workmen or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 02 1962 (SC)

The Management of Express Newspapers Ltd. Vs. Workers and Staff Employ ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-02-1962

Reported in : AIR1963SC569; [1962(5)FLR205]; (1962)IILLJ227SC; [1963]3SCR540

..... and the working journalists are entitled 2. this reference was made under section 10(1)(d) of the industrial disputes act, 1947, (xiv of 1947) (hereinafter called the act). 3. on the same day, the government of madras issued another order under section 10(3) of the act prohibiting the continuance of the strike and the lockout in the appellant concern. this order was issued because the ..... transfer. that being so, it is urged, the first part of issue no. 1 is outside the jurisdiction of the industrial court as it does not fall within the definition of an industrial dispute at all; and if the first part is outside the act, the second part cannot survive. 19. thus presented, the argument is prima facie attractive. but in appreciating the scope ..... by the ill-advised and unfortunate order passed by the state government under s. 10(2). it is hardly necessary to emphasise that since the jurisdiction of the industrial tribunal in dealing with industrial disputes referred to it under section 10 is limited by s. 10(4) to the points specifically mentioned in the reference and matters incidental there to, the appropriate government ..... called a lockout does not mean that the tribunal must hold it to be a lockout. in this connection, it may be recalled that in several cases where industrial disputes are referred for industrial adjudication in respect of certain persons named as workmen, the employers raised the contention that the specified persons are not their workmen and it has never been suggested .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 1962 (SC)

National Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. their Workmen

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-21-1962

Reported in : AIR1963SC325; [1962(5)FLR285]; (1962)IILLJ752SC; [1963]3SCR660

..... the appellant and its workmen with respect to the payment of incentive bonus, referred it for adjudication to the third industrial tribunal under s. 10 of the industrial disputes act, 1947. both the unions filed their written statements before the tribunal. subsequently disputes on the same question with three associate companies were also referred for adjudication to the same tribunal. we are, however ..... , not concerned with the disputes other than the one in which the appellant, the national iron & steel co. ltd., is concerned. 11 ..... further justified the classification of departments into direct productive, indirect productive and non-productive on the ground that it is in conformity with the existing practice in the industry. the employees in the productive departments are paid incentive bonus at the full rate which is normally payable for them for the work they do and that there ..... introduce a scheme of incentive bonus, once such a scheme is introduced the right to claim such bonus becomes a condition of service of workmen and, therefore, the industrial tribunal has jurisdiction to vary the scheme enforced by the employer including the rates of bonus. this court has pointed out in that case that the payment of .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //