<?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>1967 (8) TMI 133 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299387</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court overturned the Tribunal&#039;s decision to reinstate Subramaniam, an employee dismissed by Firestone Tyre &amp;amp; Rubber Co., finding that the domestic enquiry was fair and complied with principles of natural justice. Despite witness support for Subramaniam, the Court upheld the Company&#039;s dismissal decision based on conflicting statements and testimonies. The Court emphasized the importance of a fair enquiry process, proper consideration of evidence, and differentiated approaches based on admitted or disputed facts. The appeal was allowed, with no costs awarded, and the Company agreed not to reclaim wages paid during the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:27:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=663797" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (8) TMI 133 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299387</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court overturned the Tribunal&#039;s decision to reinstate Subramaniam, an employee dismissed by Firestone Tyre &amp;amp; Rubber Co., finding that the domestic enquiry was fair and complied with principles of natural justice. Despite witness support for Subramaniam, the Court upheld the Company&#039;s dismissal decision based on conflicting statements and testimonies. The Court emphasized the importance of a fair enquiry process, proper consideration of evidence, and differentiated approaches based on admitted or disputed facts. The appeal was allowed, with no costs awarded, and the Company agreed not to reclaim wages paid during the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299387</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>