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

2009 Supreme(All) 2483

KRISHNA MURARI, S.RAFAT ALAM
MASHOOQ AHMAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Chandra Jee Yadav for the Appellant; P.K. Mukherji for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—This is intra Court appeal.

2. We have heard Shri Chandra Jee Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri P.K. Mukherji for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

3. Writ Petition No. 46532 of 2008 was filed by M/s. Bharat Pumps & Compressors Ltd. challenging the award of the labour Court, wherein the conditional order dated 8.9.2008 staying the execution of the award was passed. The Court while passing the order dated 8.9.2008 observed that copy of the award filed alongwith the writ petition does not bear any date, but proceeded after a certified copy of the award bearing the date 2.3.2007 was produced. The appellant-workman alleging certain incorrect statement with regard to the date of the award made in the writ petition, which amounts to practising fraud upon the Court, filed contempt petition being Contempt Application No. 3685 of 2008, which was dismissed vide order dated 23.10.2008 on the finding that the fact that copy of the award did not bear any date, was in the notice of the writ Court and the workman, who was duly represented before the writ Court, himself pointed out the anomaly as well and produced the certified copy of the award bearing the date and no m






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