{"id":178807,"date":"2010-12-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010"},"modified":"2017-11-20T04:10:56","modified_gmt":"2017-11-19T22:40:56","slug":"ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: J.S.Khehar(Cj) And Chellur<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 27\"' DAY OF DECEMBER, \n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE I-ION'BLE MIR. J. s. KHEHAR, CHIEF4':JUSTi'i.CEf.'_\"' \n\nAND\n\nTHE HONELE MRS. JUsT1cE\u00b0MANJULA\u00ab  _\n\nWRIT APPEAL NO. i .OE20.1 0{L4fPER;)'  \n\nBETWEEN\n\nM\/S EHARATH  \nJALAHALLI POST. BANGALORE,~5_6o'Q\nREPRESENTED BY=I'i'S  ' 'V V \" \n\nGENERAL M.ANAGiER\u20ac{H.R]  V'  A  APPELLANT\n\n{By SIELAP D  FOR AGH ASSOCIATES, ADVS. .1\n\nAND\n\n 1.\n\n.. \u00ab\u00a7:S1%{I\"VISHNU.VMU_RTHY.\n\"  S\/O. SR1, NARAYANA,\n\n. f .. 'VA-GEO AB-OUT 42 YEARS.\n' . EMT D.'NO_;266.\n\n --..T.M;C'O_MP'OUND, 2ND MAIN ROAD\n\nE'  3RD moss, SHIVANAHALLI, BANGALORE\n\nBEL1~SC \/ST WELFARE ASSOCIATION\n\nA  NO;'T~77\/4-5, BEL COLONY.\n\n\".;TA1A1~1ALL1 POST, BANGALORE--56O 013\n\n 'R\/BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY\n\n\n\n3. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA\nDEPT. OF LABOUR VIKAS SOUDHA\nBANGADORE -- 560 001 ._\nR\/ BY PRL. SECRETARY  RESPONDENTS <\/pre>\n
{By Sri. V.S. NAIK, ADV.FOR R1) _
\n{By Sri. N D SATHISH CHANDRA, ADV. FOR <\/p>\n
(By Srl. BASAVARAJ KAREDDY — PRL. GoVT..vADyooA’Te *  N<\/p>\n
FOR R3)    <\/p>\n
This Writ Appeal is \ufb01led u\/s’-at ofthe Karnatal{al”‘IrIil\u00a7\u00a7h:
\nCourt Act praying to set aside the order.passe.dL_ in the”:Wr-‘t <\/p>\n
Petition No.9343 \/ 2009 dt:09   1 0.. ” V<\/p>\n
This Appeal having beenhelard, reserved for Jtldgment,
\non this day, Manjula Ch’e1lur;J._.,  the following:<\/p>\n
Heard’ “bot’nu_lsidles.\n<\/p>\n
 brief to the filing of the above
\nappeal are as u_nder*: V<\/p>\n
 ‘I’l1′-e responrlent’joined the service of the appellant from<\/p>\n
a.’1.2’2,:1’i1 lfsenii skilled helper. Though he started<\/p>\n
initially working at HF Section, he was changed to different<\/p>\n
\ufb01seotions from time to time. His salary also was fixed at<\/p>\n
 per day. However, he was paid salary once a<\/p>\n
month. The permanent employees in the cadre of semi-<\/p>\n
skilled helpers were getting Rs.3,500\/- per month. Though<\/p>\n
he was treated as a daily wage employee,<\/p>\n
continuously till he was refused work on  V’ <\/p>\n
dated 3.1.2994 was sent to the c=rganisati’on -:tol:re.storel”his<\/p>\n
work. When his request _was  = <\/p>\n
approached this Court in W.P;7:l’O8\/ i\u00a3”39–3.r  held’<\/p>\n
that the dispute involvesseveralll  oi lfaC’ts’,”Vtherefore,
\nit would be proper for    dispute under
\nthe Industrial.   a dispute
\nwas raised.’   the matter was decided<\/p>\n
beforeiithev  relerence came to be rejected
\nagainst’ th_e”respondeht;_’ *~ ., ” ‘ \u00ab
\n     challenged in WP. 17477\/2001.\n<\/p>\n
lllle\u00e9l\ufb01l\u00e9ld’\u00ab–..Sin\u00a7l\u00e9Wdudge by his order dated 1.2.2006
\n   setting aside the award of the Labour
\nCourt  as follows:\n<\/p>\n
L ” Secondly, it is seen that the issue framed
\nV’ V. _  was with regard to whether the petitioner was<\/p>\n
directly employed or was a contract labourer.<\/p>\n
  The Labour Court ought to have made the<\/p>\n
contractor a party to the proceedings in order to<\/p>\n
give a clear finding on the question, whether he..__
\nwas directly employed or otherwise. Thereforef,”_._f~.._
\nthere are circumstances, which stand
\nface of the award and would require inte1’fe’rer:1:ceVi’ C <\/p>\n
by this Court.”\n<\/p>\n
4. The matter was remitted  the La’b.0ur’<\/p>\n
for fresh consideration. This  cameto  int’<\/p>\n
Writ Appeal No.383\/ ar1dr”t1ieiVp_:’.’\\\/rit._Appefai*also came to
\nbe dismissed holding  the requisition
\nsent to the contract.or  or the agreement
\nentered  _  and the public<\/p>\n
undertr\u00a3akingfAwere_not produ_ced_*bef0re the Labour Court.\n<\/p>\n
5.”A_fter remand  respondent was impleaded as<\/p>\n
a party as per directions of the learned Judge in the<\/p>\n
 petitionlilllf Subsequent to the remand of the<\/p>\n
i’–~ma;ttyer;\ufb02:’thefrriyatter came to be disposed of afresh on<\/p>\n
2\u00a3i.”9__.2Q08 blyfdismissing the reference. The Labour Court<\/p>\n
 opined-tliat the alleged workman was not able to prove that<\/p>\n
C’ his service conditions and wages are similar to that of<\/p>\n
regular workman and it also opined that the appellant being<\/p>\n
public sector company, should not have engaged services of<\/p>\n
casual contract workmen as its regular worlimen.<\/p>\n
Accordingly it held that the respondent~workrnan_h<\/p>\n
entitled for any reliefs as claimed in the reference; v  Z” if<\/p>\n
6. Aggrieved by the same, this wriytlpetitioln <\/p>\n
came to be filed by respondent_No. lfseeking quuaslhing of.’the”= cg<\/p>\n
order dt.24.9.2008 in referencel”l*lo;83\/\n<\/p>\n
7. The learned isinglefl  his “border dated
\n9.4.2010 held that  fhearing it was<\/p>\n
noticed that the”1o_f:ier ;’of reference l’f1rsd\u00a7{lto the Tribunal by<\/p>\n
the Gcryernrnent,  not<suit_ably'made. In other words, the
\npoint of'referer1<:.elwas"notvappropI'iately made and opined
\nthat _the order of '1'e.i'ere'nce..shou1d be as under:<\/p>\n
 _"Wheth'erf the petitioner was employee
\n lithe contractor engaged by the
\n 1nan'_age'rnent by the BEL or not an employee
\n u,.__r1der""BEL".\n<\/p>\n
   According to the learned single Judge, without<\/p>\n
.  understanding the context and consequences, reference was<\/p>\n
 “”n1ade on some other point. Therefore, it is for the 3″‘<\/p>\n
respondent (Department of Labour) to understand the<\/p>\n
application of Writ petitioner and make reference in the<\/p>\n
above terms. Aggrieved by this order, the present””is<\/p>\n
filed.\n<\/p>\n
9. It is not in dispute that  public <\/p>\n
sector undertaking of the Governlinenltfoff  <\/p>\n
respondent raised a disputef._fwhether’  of-if<\/p>\n
BEL, its contractor and  Weifare Association
\nwas justified in  Murthy, the
\nrespondent,  contract basis
\nat Stores sjf   ifeii\u00e9r the workman is
\nentit1e:dA’to’–. 4′ V<\/p>\n
1{)’.’F’rorrVv1 Vthea it is seen that subsequent to<\/p>\n
rerna:nd,i’.at the first instance, the second respondent said to<\/p>\n
, jthet VA..co’ntractor of the appeiianvmanagement was<\/p>\n
 the Labour Court. After filing the counter<\/p>\n
stat”eme.nt,’vparties led further evidence and by the order<\/p>\n
dt..2_4.9V\u00a72t)08 the reference came to be rejected. The 2nd<\/p>\n
if  “respondent came to be impieaded in the reference for the<\/p>\n
first time by the writ petitioner only after the remand order of<\/p>\n
the learned single Judge in the 2115 writ petition.<\/p>\n
11. During the pendency of the writ  V’ <\/p>\n
9343\/2009 several appellations xi-ei?e'”penc;ing;<a}hi.c:ii: we <\/p>\n
follows:\n<\/p>\n
(i} Misc. W. No.i15’a\ufb01\/Q9 orayirigyj’:o””~–e’1’ariij} the’<\/p>\n
order dated 16i;6.?L.l000″”i…andllA’issue further
\ndirection   to issue<\/p>\n
  an\n<\/p>\n
(ii)     praying to condone the
\n ””  of   ld’ays<'l in filing the recalling
\n(iii}ll'i.._4_VlMjsc. 142490\/09 praying to recall the
\n0 Vv  307.2009 and restore the writ<\/p>\n
'\u00ab.VA:Vlp–etition to its original position: and<\/p>\n
'A   W. No.12-491\/09 praying to amend the<\/p>\n
"  petition.\n<\/p>\n
 applications came to be disposed of by order<\/p>\n
  __i:it.1ES.12.2009. Aggrieved by the order dated 15.12.2009 in<\/p>\n
.\/I<\/p>\n
Misc. W.l2490\/2009 allowing the recalling of thehorder<\/p>\n
dated 30.17.2009 and other orders, writ appeals cavme~..to.._be
\nfiled in WA. l\\l’os.327\u00ab328\/2010. Those app\u00a2a1:;\u00e9{“w\u00e91\u00a7;\u00a7<\/p>\n
dismissed. Subsequently, the writ petition was  it <\/p>\n
12. According to the appellalntfsl*c_ounsel_;_t.tl1ouglil.’th:ey_g<\/p>\n
sought time for \ufb01ling the statement” of  the’<\/p>\n
amended petition, the”liearned”lludgegdisposed oi the writ
\npetition on 9.4.2010,  has?’resulted:pingprejudice to the
\nappellant~managementi.AW  appellants, the
\nlearned  _ng–{_   framed the point of
\nreference\u00bb  thle’-:r3td'”respondent to make such
\nreference tvhegsjaine”is:”uns’ustainable. It was contended
\nthat only’ government has power to frame<\/p>\n
point of ‘referen’ce.and_this was totally ignored by the learned<\/p>\n
~ single.rVA_J1.1dge’;. __ Therefore, the learned Single Judge was<\/p>\n
.  the point of reference. According to the<\/p>\n
app’ella~nt’s”.Vcounsel, the appellant being a Central Public<\/p>\n
 Uiidertaking, under the principles of the Industrial Disputes
\n[the Central Government is the appropriate Government<\/p>\n
“and by Virtue of Notification dt.3.’\/”.98 under section 39 of<\/p>\n
the l.D Act, delegates power to the State Government.<\/p>\n
However, under Notification dt.5.5.2008, the_4vV.LCe<ntral<\/p>\n
Government has rescinded the Notification.\u00a7dt.3l.'?j;*~i9$r8_:' _<\/p>\n
Therefore, the State Government has no ju1ris'd'ie:t;.on"\u00bbto'– refer"=<\/p>\n
the point of dispute for adjudicati'on::"to..:'the_l.abou'IV:C_ourt,.<\/p>\n
With these arguments, the}? 'sought'-._fo1' gse'i.tirigv.asid_e <\/p>\n
orders of the learned Single    <\/p>\n
13. As against feioviinsel for the first
\nrespondent   ‘wrjrking under the
\nappellant  thy;  ‘ contractor. According
\nto hiI1’1.”‘thE. of  \u00e9ourt is virtually incorrect
\nand co_ntraryv  brought on record. The
\ndocumenltaglikelll  ”  and the fact that the first<\/p>\n
respondent coyered under PF’ would indicate that he<\/p>\n
‘ wasgemployrf\ufb01lv under the first respondent.<\/p>\n
 perusal of the entire records, we note that the<\/p>\n
 point’ Zdispute was referred for adjudication to the Labour
\n Court by order dt.19.6.1995. We are in 2010. At no point of<\/p>\n
time, correctness of the point of reference came to be<\/p>\n
IO<\/p>\n
questioned by the first respondent in writ petition<\/p>\n
No.9343\/2009. On earlier occasion. the Labo1,1rl_l’-.Ci’\u00a7c~urt<\/p>\n
passed an award dt.l4.ll.2000 rejecting the  _<\/p>\n
even in Writ Petition No.17477\/ questioiiiifigthe ~ordVe’r’~. <\/p>\n
of the Labour Court, no such content-iori; was.take’n’*-up=:.by<\/p>\n
the first respondent. In the-..__abse’nc_el’ of rai’sihg_v_.of<\/p>\n
contention by the first respolr’iden_t’  the learned
\nSingle Judge was justiifieiri the responsibility of
\nframing the points for    A, .\n<\/p>\n
15.   of MAHABIR JUTE
\nMILLS 3i\u00a7:ORt\u00a71’iii?U*ill…Xf\u00e9~.SHIBBON LAL SAXENA
\nAND 3375(2) LLJ 326. In this case,
\napart  scope of principles of natural<\/p>\n
ju_stice,lA’their’i had an occasion to consider the<\/p>\n
‘ ;quesij.ori.ywhether the High Court can give a direction to the<\/p>\n
‘-G.overnn1fent”to make a reference. In the said case, they were<\/p>\n
coricerned\ufb01with section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes<\/p>\n
it , “Act, which conferred powers on the Government to refer any<\/p>\n
hiridustrial dispute if it is of opinion that such a dispute exists<\/p>\n
or that any matter is connected with, or related to, the<\/p>\n
 \/<\/p>\n
l l<\/p>\n
dispute. Under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act,<\/p>\n
only the appropriate Government has power to frame. of<\/p>\n
reference and send the point of dispute for –‘-:’-}_C5′ _<\/p>\n
appropriate Labour Court or the Triiqunal. uabsience  ..<\/p>\n
the first respondent right from 1:9495;_-till:’t.od.ayl  <\/p>\n
objection to the framing of<poi_nt olf".1jeferen-.:ev';'  le_arnedjl*.<\/p>\n
Single Judge was not justiiie:d.ll.v:in. 'the; point of
\nreference and directin;_:5.4,._..':the*l_\ufb01Gover:nrrieiit I to  the said
\npoint of reference. I\ufb01rert. the impugned
\norder of the legal infirmity,
\nall that it   the Government to re–\n<\/p>\n
consider   Government how to act
\nand   “s;tatl*;:’tory discretion and what should<\/p>\n
be the<\/p>\n
point ._of’refere-nee. In other words. the High Court<\/p>\n
 ‘- ca1inot”ico1’h..pel the”‘Government to exercise its discretion in a<\/p>\n
V’  lpartieu:1a,r”man_i.1er. Even otherwise, perusal of the orders of<\/p>\n
the learried, ‘Single Judge does not even indicate how the<\/p>\n
 point ofreference already referred by the Government would<\/p>\n
 vnotl”A.cover all the controversies between the parties. In the<\/p>\n
\/<\/p>\n
absence of any such discussion, there was no justification<\/p>\n
for the learned Single Judge to take upon himself the<\/p>\n
responsibility of framing question of reference <\/p>\n
sole jurisdiction of the appropriate Governni_ent–{ _<\/p>\n
matter of fact, the appellants have also ra;se:1.41fa.,\u00a2o–:\u00a7tent:’\u00a2n–. S <\/p>\n
that it being a Central Publie Llnpdertaliingl <\/p>\n
appropriate Government beingthe C’e_nt’ral Geoifernmenlig; <\/p>\n
issued Notification dt.3.7.98ll”‘ ~tt1~1.’:ier  “of the
\nindustrial Disputes ~._powersl’tolvthe State
\nGovernment and the same’ 5.5.2008. The
\nlearned Single   effect of Withdrawal
\nof   Central Government
\ndelegg.lgting    Government under section<\/p>\n
39 of act as well.\n<\/p>\n
 16. For t3:e___reasons mentioned above, we are of the<\/p>\n
‘ ;opir1ion”.that’vt__he appeal deserves to be allowed and the<\/p>\n
it  before a learned Single Judge for disposal<\/p>\n
of the Writ’ petition on merits afresh.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed. The mafpter be
\nplaced before a learned Single Judge for disposal <\/p>\n
petition on merits afresh.\n<\/p>\n
    JUDGE<\/p>\n
Kvs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010 Author: J.S.Khehar(Cj) And Chellur IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 27″‘ DAY OF DECEMBER, PRESENT THE I-ION’BLE MIR. J. s. KHEHAR, CHIEF4’:JUSTi’i.CEf.’_”‘ AND THE HONELE MRS. JUsT1cE\u00b0MANJULA\u00ab _ WRIT APPEAL NO. i .OE20.1 0{L4fPER;)’ […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-178807","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-12-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-19T22:40:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-19T22:40:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1817,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010\",\"name\":\"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-19T22:40:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-19T22:40:56+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-19T22:40:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010"},"wordCount":1817,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010","name":"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-19T22:40:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-bharath-electronics-ltd-vs-sri-vishnu-murthy-so-narayana-on-27-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S Bharath Electronics Ltd. vs Sri Vishnu Murthy S\/O Narayana on 27 December, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178807","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=178807"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178807\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=178807"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=178807"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=178807"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}