{"id":31431,"date":"2010-10-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010"},"modified":"2017-07-15T08:02:33","modified_gmt":"2017-07-15T02:32:33","slug":"sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman … vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka … on 18 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman … vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka … on 18 October, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: V.G.Sabhahit And A.S.Bopanna<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE\n'TH  \nDATED THIS THE I 8 DAY OF OCTOBER, 201,0--..__ \nPRESENT 'W V I\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUST1cEy.G.SAB'HAH1T'f  \"\nAND V ' .\nTHE HONBLE MR.JUST1cE\"A.,S'; 13OI%Ai$I.,EA I\nWRIT APPEAL NO. 1854 E20026 -(L:-TTER1Vfg\n\nBETWEEN J ' 3 A Z\n\nSR1 SHANKAR SINGH,  \n\nS\/O.  S11~.T'GI--1,'g _ _  - \nAGED   \"  \n\nR\/A. DILEEP'NAGAR_, \"    \u00bb\n\nAT HILMAN TOTLA,   \n\nD1STR1_cT.KUSHINAOAR';  \" \nUTTAR PRADEE-_H 274 4;02._ _ . ...APPELLANT\n\n{BY SMT. MANJULA   ADV, SR1. V.S. NAIK,\n\n T._THE\"1\u00bbTANAGEME.NT OF M\/S. BHORUKA\n\n' Ng yREPTD,BYITSNUUUKHNGIMRECTOR.\n\n'PE\u00a7{T(ILES;_\"_vSA1.'I'UR\nPOST RAYAPEJR,\nDISTRICT --*OHARwAD\n\n.\"RESPONDENT\n\n  (BYEVI:\/S. Z.N. HANSI & HANSI ASSTS., ADVS.,}\n\n\n\nTHIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF'\nTHE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TOIXSET\nASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITIQN._ i\\I_C).\n5367\/2006 DATED 29\/O8\/2006.     \"\n\nTHIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD K I ..\nFOR JUDGEMENT AND iC,QM1Nc;\"~\u00bb,._0N  \"FOR \"\n\nPRONOUNCEMENT OP' JUDGEMENT *1T~I1S; DAY_SA_B_I~1AHIT\nJ, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:     \" \"  \nJUDGMEN\"r'.__ '-\n\nThis appeal is filed by the\"t--unsuccessfu_I_:  in I\n\nW.P.No,_536'? \/ 2006 beir1gVaggrieVer;i:'Dy\"'the order dated 29-8-\n2006 wherein the learned'SingTe::'Juld:ge..Lof..this Court has\n\ndeclined to interfere   by the Labour\n\nCourt,  per Annexurewd to the\nWrit petition  Writ petition.\n\n2. Itis-I the case \"of:_ll..the appellant herein that he was\n\n. worE\u00a7;ingl'as an Assistant Spinning Master on a consolidated\n\n salary .Voi'\u00ab.Rs:f22_O1\/-- per month as on the date of alleged\n\ntern'--1iinatior_t--._notiee. He had put in 11 years of service as he\n\n-- joined  services as Assistant Spinning Master [Production]\n\n,::i'1'omt_ May, 1989 on a monthly consolidated salary of\n\nD  n's'.'2';2o1\/w and from 1991 Rs.2.345\/-- plus Rs.500\/-- towards\n\n  The appellant was working sincerely and his services\n\n'E\n\n(W\n\n. \n<\/pre>\n
, -K<\/p>\n
L:\n<\/p>\n
were satisfactory. It is the case of the appellant that<\/p>\n
termination notice was issued on 19-4-1991 statinglithlat his<\/p>\n
services would be terminated after completgion<\/p>\n
months from the date of this notice. _.N–o….iI’f:aso:ns were.\u00bb <\/p>\n
assigned to the termination andizno chajrge,was’-.frar13.ed1,and 1<\/p>\n
no enquiry was held. He was\u00e9not allowed to <\/p>\n
Roll of the respondent     same day
\ni.e., on 19-4-1991 ‘   letter by the
\nrespondentlstating that transferred to
\nBhiwandi depotggwrigth  there were no<\/p>\n
spinning’ machines\u00bb ‘and “spinning production unit in<\/p>\n
Bhiwandi VA:’Being”‘agg.ri_’eved by the same, he raised a
\ndispute before the”9:.l;aho1__1\ufb01r’Court, Hubli in 2:11) No. 27\/1992.<\/p>\n
Before the \u00bb.Lual:’)’o’ur.lV’Court, the workman filed a claim<\/p>\n
  and tl’1e’ll\\\/lanagement filed a written statement<\/p>\n
  is false to allege that termination of the<\/p>\n
cl.aima11~t effect from 18-7-1991 is illegal and as per the<\/p>\n
 Atern1s___ the agreement, respondent can terminate the<\/p>\n
 ‘vseriices of the claimant by giving three months notice<\/p>\n
Hlwithout assigning any reason. The claimant was working as<\/p>\n
Assistant Spinning Manager and was working in a
\nsupervisory capacity and was not a workman and therefore,<\/p>\n
the dispute was not maintainable and termination<\/p>\n
services of the claimant is as per the agreemen_t*:entere..’d \u00bb<\/p>\n
between the claimant and the respondent a3’1.d”I”iCll:SilgHlaVh\u00a31Sif<\/p>\n
been attached to the claimant while terminating-.hi’s s\u00e9jjmces.<\/p>\n
Therefore, there is no question\u00ab.__of violating ti3’e”pi’vin_cip1es of._*<\/p>\n
natural justice and holding of enfqtiiryygwas’unnecessary.\n<\/p>\n
3. Before the Laborir {_?oL1;rt,u”the.’Workman examined<\/p>\n
himself as WW.1__and got  Q W4. On behalf<\/p>\n
of the Manage_men.t’,lt’.yo’–witnesses._were*–examined as M.Ws.1<\/p>\n
and 2a_and 1; to M5. The Labour Court,
\nby order dated  that the applicant was a<\/p>\n
workman \\yithin’vtl”1e.lmeaning of Industrial Disputes Act,<\/p>\n
‘l V’  .,1g94~7;’and the dispuvtelyyas maintainable. It further held that<\/p>\n
 ._.teifIIiinatio_nv ofservices of the workman was in accordance<\/p>\n
wlithrlthe.  of the agreement and clause (10) of the<\/p>\n
‘r..,agreemen1t provided that the company may terminate the<\/p>\n
 of the employee by giving three months notice or<\/p>\n
  three months notice pay in lieu of notice, without assigning<\/p>\n
any reasons even after expiry of this agreement. Therefore, it<\/p>\n
was unnecessary to hold any enquiry and <\/p>\n
termination is legal and justified. According].yf–  <\/p>\n
Court dismissed the petition.   ._<\/p>\n
4. Being aggrieved by the said  <\/p>\n
Labour Court, the  I’\ufb01PI3e1Qiar1\u00a3”ixfgri\u00e9hii\u00e9iil”* *’;fi1ed=]’<\/p>\n
W.P.No.5367\/2006 reiteratingp__t:h:e:_’conten\ufb01o;1:f,1ti\u00e9n before
\nthe Labour Court.  by the
\nrespondent contendingithzit  in accordance
\nwith the terms    was not a
\nworkman and  rightiy dismissed the
\npetition!  Judge after considering the
\ncontentionofappearing for the parties held<\/p>\n
that pthepfinding ‘of.7’the- Labour Court is that the applicant<\/p>\n
“‘vwpas’e’–a’Workf11an wasjdustified and termination is in terms of<\/p>\n
 agreement as clause 10 of the said agreement<\/p>\n
speci\ufb01caliydiprovided for termination of the services of the<\/p>\n
 V’-.emp1oyee_A7~by giving three months notice or three months<\/p>\n
in lieu of notice without assigning any reasons and no<\/p>\n
  stigma has been attached in the order of termination. The<\/p>\n
V : 1:’:\n<\/p>\n
K\u00e9w s
\nif<\/p>\n
learned Single Judge also held that the order of transfer has<\/p>\n
nothing to do with the order of termination as by<\/p>\n
the Labour Court. Accordingly, the learned.–A4″Singlle’budge<\/p>\n
declined to interfere with the award  <\/p>\n
Court. Being aggrieved by the said.&order’lpassed..li1i_lth.\u00e9..vvi\u00e9\ufb01t<\/p>\n
petition, this writ appeal is <\/p>\n
5. We have heard the leallrn..edvV_Vcounselappearing for
\nthe appellant and  counsel:’Rappearing for the
\nrespondent.   it t 2 V’ ‘V l<\/p>\n
6. The    for the appellant
\nsubmitted it  Court has held that
\nappellant    that dispute was maintainable,
\nnotice of  clearly show that his services<\/p>\n
were, terminated ‘on the ground that his services were not<\/p>\n
ll  and therefore, charge had to be framed and<\/p>\n
   held and that clause 10 in the contract of<\/p>\n
employment’ services can be terminated by giving three<\/p>\n
V’-.,months,rilotice itself is arbitrary and therefore, the notice of<\/p>\n
lteerrnitnation is liable to be set aside and the learned Single<\/p>\n
K4<\/p>\n
K <.;.5.fa%;.\n<\/p>\n
Judge ought to have set aside the award and allowed the<\/p>\n
writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
7. The learned counsel for the respondeintvargued’.’_”in*.<\/p>\n
support of the order passed by the__Labour it ‘<\/p>\n
submitted that the respondent was under <\/p>\n
approached the BIFR and’ll__tii.e unit :is.  the’<\/p>\n
termination is in accordancep_x2sril:h__tl<I.\u00bbe se.rv'iceV_AAcorltract and
\nthe appellant has gainfully'empiloyedjvinlGanganagar Textile
\nCompany in Rajasthan.-ii' V l l l<\/p>\n
8. l__learnejd_rcouln:-el  the appellant has<\/p>\n
further suhmititeigl order of transfer which was
\nalso issued_xonsvthehdatewdlofp_termination notice dated 19-4-
\n1991 would ipclearl\u00a7r’:Vsi1oi7v._lthat the order was issued with the<\/p>\n
mala\ufb02de motivepp and therefore, order of termination ought to<\/p>\n
 ‘- have been set aside.\n<\/p>\n
 fha.lve given our careful consideration to the<\/p>\n
contentions’ foil learned counsel appearing for the parties and<\/p>\n
 scrutinised the material on record.\n<\/p>\n
it v   10. The material on record would clearly show that the<\/p>\n
  appellant was appointed under a contract and Clause 10 of<\/p>\n
8<\/span><\/p>\n
the agreement provided that the Company may terminate the
\nservices of the employee by giving three months notice or
\nthree months notice pay in lieu of notice, without assigning<\/p>\n
any reasons even before expiry of the agreement. -fact<\/p>\n
that the termination notice was issued on <\/p>\n
in dispute. The order of transfer was issued  the l<\/p>\n
day. The said order of transfer at E;:.W+’3\u00ab was  <\/p>\n
Labour Court to indicate that the same was an’ar1*’a.nge’m’ent”.<\/p>\n
within the period of three mo11t.h’s._pof notice .pleriodvV.’lVDu”ring ”<\/p>\n
the period of three months notice’,   notlcomrnunicated<\/p>\n
with any other order of  qiasrightly held by<\/p>\n
the  lthe’>le:arnedlSingle Judge and therefore
\ntermination is in lVlthe..~’contract of employment. The<\/p>\n
Labour _V Court has  appreciated the documentary<\/p>\n
 the oral evidence of the appellant<\/p>\n
  hvasvandmitted the contents of the document and<\/p>\n
thatqtlhe  were bound by the contract. Hence, the<\/p>\n
lgfacts herein are not analogous to the situation in the cited<\/p>\n
‘Further, it is not disputed that the respondent’s unit is<\/p>\n
 not in existence as it was under financial loss and<\/p>\n
\\J<\/p>\n
9<\/span>
\napproached the BIFR and the appellant, according to the<\/p>\n
material on record, is working in another Spinning Company<\/p>\n
at Ganganagar Textiie Company in Rajasthan;\u00bb.VV_:”-Haiving<\/p>\n
regard to the above stated facts of the case}:Mthe~VV.’decision<\/p>\n
reiied upon the learned counsel apppearing”fo’r.:th:e”appei\u00a7.an’t, <\/p>\n
is not helpfui to him in the pre.sent”sQ\u00e9isee;.. V ‘In”-xfi’e\u00a7,fva,,__0f:t}\u00ab1e<\/p>\n
specific terms of the contract of einpioymevnht\ufb01pand the <\/p>\n
that the respondent has unit’,  hc\u00e9gd that the
\norder passed by    jiistified and
\ndoes not suffer  so as to call<\/p>\n
   -appeal is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
sd\/4
\nJudge<\/p>\n
sdi~=;\n<\/p>\n
Judge<\/p>\n
 *sp<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman … vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka … on 18 October, 2010 Author: V.G.Sabhahit And A.S.Bopanna IN THE HIGH COURT OF’ KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE ‘TH DATED THIS THE I 8 DAY OF OCTOBER, 201,0–..__ PRESENT ‘W V I THE HON’BLE MR.JUST1cEy.G.SAB’HAH1T’f ” AND V ‘ . […]<\/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-31431","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman ... vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka ... on 18 October, 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\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman ... vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka ... on 18 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-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=\"2010-10-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-15T02:32:33+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri Shankar Singh S\\\/O Ram Laxman … vs The Management Of M\\\/S Bhoruka … on 18 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-15T02:32:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1200,\"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\\\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri Shankar Singh S\\\/O Ram Laxman ... vs The Management Of M\\\/S Bhoruka ... on 18 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-15T02:32:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri Shankar Singh S\\\/O Ram Laxman … vs The Management Of M\\\/S Bhoruka … on 18 October, 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:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"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":"Sri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman ... vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka ... on 18 October, 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\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman ... vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka ... on 18 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-15T02:32:33+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman … vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka … on 18 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-15T02:32:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010"},"wordCount":1200,"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\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010","name":"Sri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman ... vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka ... on 18 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-15T02:32:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-shankar-singh-so-ram-laxman-vs-the-management-of-ms-bhoruka-on-18-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri Shankar Singh S\/O Ram Laxman … vs The Management Of M\/S Bhoruka … on 18 October, 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:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","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\/31431","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=31431"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31431\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31431"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31431"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31431"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}