Its Workmen, [1960], 2 S. This latter suit was filed by the passengers and owners of goods in a representative capacity under O. 2 (14), was not argued before the Court and was not really raised in that form. Best Revenue Lawyers in Chandigarh this suit, the appellants prayed that the provisions of Part III of the said Act were 901 unconstitutional and asked for an injunction restraining the respondent, the State of Bihar, from levying and realising the said tax.
60/1951 in the Court of the First Subordinate judge at Gaya on May 5, 1951. (4) The Labour Commissioner, Punjab, before passing orders on a reference made under second proviso to, sub-rule (3), shall give the Welfare Officer an opportunity of showing cause against the action proposed to be taken, against him and if necessary, may hear the parties in person. 57/1951) on behalf of the passengers and owners of goods for obtaining similar reliefs against the bus operators.
The predominant activity of the University of Delhi is outside the Act, because teaching and teachers connected with it do not come within its purview, and so, the minor and incidental activity carried on by the subordinate staff which may fall within the purview of the Act cannot alter the predominant character of the institution. Reading the judgment as a whole there can be no doubt that the question as to whether educational work carried on by educational institutions like the University of Delhi which have been formed primarily and solely for the purpose of imparting education amounts to an industry within the meaning of s.
It would thus be clear that if the test of the character of the predominant activity of the institution which was applied to the Corporation is applied to the University of Delhi, the answer would be plainly against the respondents. ” This section, as the opening words indicate, will come into play only when the Court is satisfied that 390 there is reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable wrong, that is to say, there should be a prima facie evidence that a person was a party to the conspiracy before his acts can be used against his co-conspirators.
The argument is that the word ‘industry, in its broadest connotation which is intended by s. Similarly, it is urged that where the legislature wants to exclude agriculture from the scope of industrial legislation, it sometimes takes care to make a specific provision in that behalf; and this argument is sought to be supported by reference to s. Applying the same test to the Corporation as a whole, the question was examined and the inclusion of the education department Famous Revenue Advocates in Chandigarh the award was upheld.
It appears that a similar suit was instituted (No. extending beyond the limits of any one State including disputes in relation to employment upon State railway or to employment Revenue Lawyers in Chandigarh industries carried on by or under the control of the Commonwealth or a State or any public authority constituted under the Commonwealth or a St ate; but it does not include dispute relating to employment in any agricultural, viticul- tural, horticultural, or dairying persuitt.
Textile Labour Association, [1960] INSC 47; [1960] 3 S. “Where there is reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable wrong, anything said, done or written by any one of such persons in reference to their common intention, after the time when such intention was first entertained by any one of them, is a relevant fact as against each of the persons believed to be so conspiring as well for the purpose of proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose of showing that any such person was a party to it.
Counsel for the tenant-defendants canvassed before the High Court the correctness of the findings recorded by the trial judge regarding the zeraiti character of the land and the further finding. 4 of the Australian Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1901, which defines an “‘industrial dispute” as meaning a dispute in relation to industrial matters. The main attack against the award proceeded on the basis that what the 720 Corporation was doing through its several departments was work which could be regarded as regal or governmental, and as such, was outside the purview of the Act, and that argument was rejected.
as regards the date from which they were in possession and cultivation of the lands and the nature and character of their possession. 2(j) would include agriculture, and if the Legislature had intended that agriculture should be excluded from the scope of the said definition, it would have adopted the precedent of the Australian law while enacting s. The learned judges therefore examined the oral and documentary evidence bearing upon these points and arrived at the same conclusion as the learned trial judge.
Nearly a year after this Act came into force, the appellants challenged its validity by instituting a suit No. this Act levied a tax on passengers and goods carried by public service motor vehicles Top Civil Lawyers in Chandigarh Bihar. The other point which is also relevant is that one of the tests laid down by this Court was that if a department was carrying on predominantly industrial activities, the fact that some of its activities may not be industrial did not matter.
32 and Bharatkhand Textile Mfg. Held that the gratuity schemes are always made in the expectation of the industry continuing to function for a long time to come and hence the Industrial Court acted wrongly in framing any gratuity scheme for payment of gratuity by the company to its employees, Indian Hume Pipe Co.