G.S.AHLUWALIA
Sumedha Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Central Government Industrial Tribunal And Others – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Heard on the question of admission.
2. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 20-12-2019 passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow in Appeal No. 53/2019 by which the appeal filed the petitioner against the order dated 10-10-2019 passed under Section 7-Q of The Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, has been dismissed on the ground that it is not maintainable.
3. According to the petitioner, the necessary facts for disposal of the present petition in short are that the petitioner is a Private Limited Company and is working as an authorized dealers for Vehicles/Cars. The petitioner's establishment is situated at Gwalior, and the office of respondents no. 2 and 3 are also situated in Gwalior and the order dated 10-10-2019 was also passed at Gwalior. Thus it is claimed that, a part of Cause of Action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, therefore, this Court has a jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition against the order dated 20- 12-2019 passed by CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow. It is not disputed by the Petitioner, that Peti
Arcot Textile Mills Limited vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and others
C.I.T., A.P. vs. Ashoka Engg. Co.
Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh vs. M/s. Popular Trading Company
Gwalior Rayons Co. Ltd. vs. Custodian of Vested Forests
K.V. Balan and another vs. Sivagiri Sree Narayana Dharma Sanghom Trust and others
Karnataka Rare Earth vs. Deptt. of Mines & Geology
Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank Limited vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner and others
Mohd. Shahabuddin vs. State of Bihar
Organo Chemical Industries vs. Union of India
P.S. Sathappan vs. Andhra Bank Ltd.
Shree Vishal Printers Ltd. vs. Provident Fund Commr.
Smita Subhash Sawant vs. Jagdeeshwari Jagdish Amin
Srikanta Datta Narasimharaja Wodiyar vs. Enforcement Officer, Mysore
State of Jharkhand vs. Govind Singh
Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. vs. State of U.P.
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.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.