<?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>1987 (3) TMI 531 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457510</link>
    <description>Where contract labour performs the same or similar work as directly employed workmen, the statutory equal-wages entitlement under the Contract Labour framework can be worked out in a computation proceeding under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, because the Labour Court may determine a pre-existing right and quantify its monetary value, though it cannot decide a disputed industrial claim requiring reference under Section 10. On the facts stated, similarity of work was not disputed, so no separate adjudication was needed. The principal employer can also be made liable where the contractor defaults, because the contract labour statute makes the contractor primarily responsible but preserves the principal employer&#039;s liability for short payment or non-payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Sep 2024 10:39:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=769716" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (3) TMI 531 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457510</link>
      <description>Where contract labour performs the same or similar work as directly employed workmen, the statutory equal-wages entitlement under the Contract Labour framework can be worked out in a computation proceeding under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, because the Labour Court may determine a pre-existing right and quantify its monetary value, though it cannot decide a disputed industrial claim requiring reference under Section 10. On the facts stated, similarity of work was not disputed, so no separate adjudication was needed. The principal employer can also be made liable where the contractor defaults, because the contract labour statute makes the contractor primarily responsible but preserves the principal employer&#039;s liability for short payment or non-payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457510</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>