Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.H. KAPADIA, CJI., A.K. PATNAIK, SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.
Bharat Aluminium Company - Appellant
Versus
Kaiser Aluminium Technical - Respondent.
Civil Appeals No. 7019 of 2005 with Nos. 6284 of 2004, 3678 of 2007 and Transferred Case (C) No. 35 of 2007.
Decided on : 01-11-2011
ORDER :
S. H. Kapadia, CJI.
Place these matters on 10-1-2012, before the Constitution Bench. Liberty is granted to the parties to complete the pleadings within four weeks from today.
SLPs (C) Nos. 27824 and 27841 of 2011
2. Taken on Board. Mr Amar Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner(s), mentioned these petitions and stated that issues arising in these petitions are akin to Civil Appeal No. 7019 of 2005 and connected matters. Hence, these petitions be also taken up for hearing along with Civil Appeal No. 7019 of 2005 before the Constitution Bench.
3. We order accordingly.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
