WORKERS\' UNION versus GENERAL PRODUCTS INDUSTRIES
Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Under Section 34, Application under Section 34, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, in which the General Secretary of the Collecting Bargaining Agent alleges non-payment of bonuses by the Establishment Management that they were harmed. And he filed an affidavit in his accountant's proof, which was, but was not presented for cross-examination. The person who signed the statement from the establishment was also not examined and the appellant's union was not examined. The issue of prosecuting the case was also not examined and the appellant's mo The defendant was not brought to the conclusion that the appellant had not produced any documentary evidence to prove that. The Calcutta Bargaining Agent for the Bonus Claim was the Appellant's General Secretary, relying on some entry in the written statement filed by the respondent before the National Industrial Relations Commission but the memo did not provide a certified copy of the Appellant's request under the circumstances. The matter may be forwarded to Labor. The court is presenting a request to the trial tribunal to take the decision on the properties, after setting aside the labor tribunal's order in the appeal, and setting aside the opportunity to present evidence to the parties. Submitted to, if they wish
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
