https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465520 A reference under the Industrial Disputes Act directed to the management of a sugar factory was held not to be proceedings against the company in liquidation, because actual management had passed to a court-sanctioned lessee and the liquidator was no longer in control; leave of the winding-up court under section 171 of the Companies Act was therefore unnecessary. The Court also held that, for sections 33 and 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, the relevant employer must be the same employer who was party to the industrial dispute and in subsisting relationship with the workmen when the reference began. A later lessee who was neither impleaded nor a successor, assign, or benamidar was not bound by the reference or award, so the section 33A complaints were not maintainable. en-us Tue, 04 Nov 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Dec 2025 11:17:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465520 A reference under the Industrial Disputes Act directed to the management of a sugar factory was held not to be proceedings against the company in liquidation, because actual management had passed to a court-sanctioned lessee and the liquidator was no longer in control; leave of the winding-up court under section 171 of the Companies Act was therefore unnecessary. The Court also held that, for sections 33 and 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, the relevant employer must be the same employer who was party to the industrial dispute and in subsisting relationship with the workmen when the reference began. A later lessee who was neither impleaded nor a successor, assign, or benamidar was not bound by the reference or award, so the section 33A complaints were not maintainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 04 Nov 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465520