<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (12) TMI 226 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111409</link>
    <description>Company quarters allotted solely as service accommodation become wrongful to retain after termination of employment unless a subsisting court order protects possession. Mere pendency of labour proceedings or an industrial dispute challenging termination does not, by itself, keep the employer-employee relationship alive for resisting liability under section 630 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956. Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 afforded no protection on the facts because no legally effective order justified continued occupation. The appellate court therefore erred in treating the disputed termination as sufficient to negate wrongful withholding, and the trial court convictions were restored with direction to hand over vacant possession.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:28:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148425" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 226 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111409</link>
      <description>Company quarters allotted solely as service accommodation become wrongful to retain after termination of employment unless a subsisting court order protects possession. Mere pendency of labour proceedings or an industrial dispute challenging termination does not, by itself, keep the employer-employee relationship alive for resisting liability under section 630 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956. Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 afforded no protection on the facts because no legally effective order justified continued occupation. The appellate court therefore erred in treating the disputed termination as sufficient to negate wrongful withholding, and the trial court convictions were restored with direction to hand over vacant possession.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111409</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>