The contract was unconditional, the goods sold were specific. The said statement was published in the “Blitz”, 237 which is a weekly magazine of Bombay, on July 23, 1957, and extracts from it were given publicity in the “Times of India” and certain other papers. They were in a deliverable state and therefore the Property Lawyers in Chandigarh in the goods did pass at the time when the contract was made. But the argument on behalf of the appellants is that the notice of December 17 gives the reason for the discharge and the tribunal confined only to that notice and has to consider whether the reason given in that notice for discharge is justified.
The interpretation of this clause necessarily takes us to its previous history. The Union took up the cause and ultimately the dispute was referred to the Tribunal, where the respondent raised the preliminary objection that the reference was invalid inasmuch is the dispute referred to the Tribunal was not an industrial dispute but was merely an individual dispute, and besides these dismissed employees no other employees of the respon- dent was a member of the Union, and so the Union could not raise the dispute.
As stated above, the Tribunal referred the question set out above. We have already set out-that,notice and it certainly says that the workmen mentioned at the foot of the notice had failed to record their willingness to work faithfully and diligently in accordance with the respondent’s notice of December 15, 1960, and therefore they stood discharged from the respondent’s services and their names had been struck off the rolls from December 18, 1960. In appeal by special leave; Out of 45 employees of the respondent, 18 had become members of a Trade Union.
This section provides that where there is an unconditional contract for the sale of specific goods in a deliverable state, the Property Lawyers Chandigarh High Court in the goods passes to the buyer when the contract is made and it is immaterial whether the time of payment ‘of price or the time of delivery of the goods or both is postponed. 2,00,000/- to Mohan Industries and crediting the various accounts in the same way. Partap Singh Kairon, who was at the relevant time the Chief Minister of the State of Punjab.
The criminal proceedings against the appellant were started on a complaint filed by Surinder Singh Kairon, son of S. The Tribunal also relied on the letter dated March 11, 1948, from Mohan Industries to the Director of Industries, and the first annual report dated March 22, 1949. This section would have applied even if the time of payment 392 of price hand been postponed. 1 of the Constitution.
In 1946, the respondent moved for the revision of the said award (Revision Petition No. CI/65 –14 446 Province”; what do the words “as if” indicate in the context ? According to the, complaint, the defamatory statement was, absolutely untrue and by publishing it, the appellant had rendered himself liable to be punished under s. Later, these 18 employees were dismissed by an order passed on the same day. The, Judgment of the Court was delivered by Gajendragadkar,C.
In other words, what is the meaning of the clause “the territories which were being administered as if they formed part of that 65Sup. Mukerjee’s argument is that it is common ground that this portion of Chilahati was being administered as if it was a part of the Province of West Bengal; and so, it must be deemed to have been included in the territory of West Bengal within the meaning of the First Schedule, and if that is so, it is a part of the territory of India under Art.
401 of 1953, and 297 and 298 of 1954 respectively. 500 07 the Indian Penal Code, and the sentence imposed on him for the said offence. In the present case, as already stated, the payment allowed by instalments is to be deemed payment in full at the time of the delivery of the goods sold. It is true that since this part of Chilahati was not transferred to Pakistan at the proper time, it has been regarded as part of West Bengal and administered as such.
Appeals from the judgment and decrees dated January 5, and January 22, 1959, and 24th November 1960 of the Patna Chandigarh High Court Property Lawyers High Court Property Lawyers in appeals from Original Decrees Nos. This was upheld by the Tribunal. But the question is : does this fact satisfy the requirement of Entry 13 on which the argument is based ? ,By this appeal, which has been brought to this Court by special leave, the appellant Harbhajan Singh challenges the correctness of his conviction for an offence under S.
In his complaint, the complainant Surinder Singh alleged that the appellant had published in the Press a statement against him which was highly defamatory of him. By this revision petition, the respondent claimed that the rise in the cost of living should be neutralised fully instead of 76%, and this claim was based on the allegation that the profits of the textile industry had maintained a High Court Property Lawyer level and the reduction in the extent of neutralisation from Property Advocates Of Chandigarh High Court 96% to 76% in the award of the previous year had adversely affected the employees and they had in fact begun to leave the industry.