1986 PLP 464 (PLC)
MUHAMMAD AMIN BHATTI Versus FINANCE MANAGER, SUTLEJ COTTON MILLS Ltd. Okara
| Citation | 1986 PLP 464 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AMIN BHATTI Versus FINANCE MANAGER, SUTLEJ COTTON MILLS Ltd. Okara |
| Primary Law | Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 464 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 464 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 464 (PLC) (MUHAMMAD AMIN BHATTI Versus FINANCE MANAGER, SUTLEJ COTTON MILLS Ltd. Okara). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Muhammad Asghar for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Anwar Ghuman for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 28th October, 1986.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 38(5.)‑‑Contempt‑‑Petition/complaint does not lie after compromise of parties.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 38(5.)‑‑Contempt‑‑Petition/complaint does not lie after compromise of parties. Malik Muhammad Asghar for Petitioner. Muhammad Anwar Ghuman for Respondent. Date of hearing: 28th October, 1986. This is a second contempt petition on the allegation that wages from the date of submitting the duty report onward have been paid at the rate of 50$. Compromise was effected in the previous petition to the effect that the order of this Tribunal would be implemented within sixty days so far as payment of back benefits has concerned. Admittedly, back benefits have been paid. After compromise no fresh petition lies when the needful has been done according to the previous order. If wages are being paid for the future at a lesser rate, legal remedy may be sought but in view of the compromise, no fresh petition lies. The complaint is thus filed. A. E. Complaint filed.