Back
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, SUBHASH CHAND
Suraj Mukhi @ Suraj, son of Late Jagdish Mukhi – Appellant
Versus
JUSCO Ltd. Jamshedpur, P. O. and P. S. Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
I.A. No. 4899 of 2020:
1. This interlocutory application has been filed for condoning the delay of 186 days, which has occurred in preferring this appeal.
2. No counter affidavit to the delay condonation application has been filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and considering the statements made in this application, we are of the view that the appellant was prevented from sufficient cause in preferring this appeal within time.
5. Accordingly, this interlocutory application is allowed and the delay of 186 days in preferring this appeal, is hereby condoned.
6. With the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard at this stage for final disposal.
L.P.A. No. 918 of 2019:
7. This intra court appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent are directed against the order/judgment dated 18.05.2019 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(L) No. 6127 of 2012, whereby and whereunder, the award dated 09.08.2012 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jamshedpur in Reference Case No.10 of 2007 by which the reference has been decided against the appellant-writ petitioner, has
The finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal can only be challenged if it suffers from perversity or there is a jurisdictional error.
The date of birth recorded in Form B is conclusive evidence to determine the age of the workman, and the court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is limited in reviewing fi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of reasonable explanation for delay in raising a dispute and the entitlement of the workman to the correction of his date of birth i....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court's jurisdiction to interfere with the award is limited to cases of perversity of finding or when the award is based on erroneous evid....
The court emphasized that the jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari is a supervisory jurisdiction and findings of fact reached by the tribunal cannot be reopened or questioned in writ proceeding....
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
