SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1962 Supreme(SC) 254

K.C.DAS GUPTA, P.B.GAJENDRAGADKAR, J.R.MUDHOLKAR
Kirloskar Oil Engines – Appellant
Versus
Hanmant Laxman Bibawe – Respondent


Advocates:
I.M.SHROFF, K.R.CHAUDHARY

P.B.GAJENDRA GADKAR, 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, 1958, and that he had been working as such watchman with the appellant and had become its permanent workman. On May 15,1960, the Security Officer of the appellant Company intimated to him that he had been discharged from service with 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 Industrial Tribunal. In other words, his case was that his discharge was in contravention of the provisions of s. 33 and that is the basis of his application under s. 33-A.

(2) THE appellant denied that the respondent was its employee. It pleaded that the respondents services had been made available to the appellant by an arrange









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top