SEARLE PAKISTAN LIMITED, S.I.T.E., KARACHI versus NIGHAT MATEEN
Articles 25A, 36 (2) and 38 (3A) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 Practice and Procedure Employer, who did not file inquiry report and inquiry proceedings in the Labor Court very early, documents additional late oath. Submitted with the document but the Labor Court refused to bring any additional evidence on record that the Civil Procedure Code should have been presented at a preliminary stage in 1908 under the Code of Civil Procedure for the purpose of deciding labor cases. The restrictions and the other. The technical and formalities were not applicable, but the Labor Courts had far more powers to go beyond the rules of procedure provided in the Civil Procedure Code and to exercise such powers that would be fair, equitable and appropriate for dispute resolution. En Since the inquiry report and the consideration of the approval were necessary for the proceedings to be useful and controversial, the Labor Court should have been allowed to present the evidence on jw.org ur technical evidence to dismiss such evidence. In the final step instead of doing full justice
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
