MULLER AND PHIPPS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD. versus MUHAMMAD WASEEM SHAMS
The Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Sections 54 and 55 were filed in the letter with the complaining union or workers by the respondent worker in violation of an agreement between the applicants / parties with regard to the use of Urdu by the respondents. A similar agreement was signed in 1985 in which it was mutually exclusive. The contract memorandum / agreement shall be in English and all correspondence with the union or labor shall be made in the Urdu Applicant Establishment, on which notice is given on the notice board for payment of bonuses to each category of workers in English. Documentary evidence suggests that there was no such clause. The 1989 agreement which was authentic and documentary evidence also states that the correspondence between the Workers' Union and the Respondents was signed in English in 1988 and 1989 \ The relations between the parties were not pleasant and The defendants had a complaint against the applicants either true or not otherwise. The offense was irrespective of the facts of the case as disclosed in the complaint and it is likely that there may be no violation of the complaint in the case. In filing a complaint in any case by the respondent worker is an abuse of the court process, the order of the labor court in filing the proceedings against the officers was not practicable by the applicant. The order was set aside and the defendant's complaint was dismissed because no trial was filed.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
