SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Guj) 928

K.M.THAKER
Hitendra Laxmichand Soni – Appellant
Versus
Shaikh & Company – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Doshi for S.P. Majmudar, Advocate
For the Respondents:Yogen N. Pandya, Advocate

JUDGMENT

K.M. Thaker, J.

1. Heard Mr. Doshi, learned advocate for Mr. Majumdar learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Pawar, learned advocate for the respondent.

2. In this petition, the petitioner has brought under challenge order dated 6.2.2007 passed by learned labour Court, Ahmedabad whereby the learned labour Court rejected the Recovery Application filed by present petitioner by invoking provisions under Section 33(C-2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [hereinafter referred to as the "Act"].

3. So far as the factual background is concerned it has emerged from the record of present petition that the petitioner herein filed an application under Section 33(C-2) of the Act and raised claim/demand for sum of Rs. 2,65,500/- against present respondent. The said application was registered as Recovery Application No. 378 of 2006.

3.1. Upon receipt of the notice from the learned Court with regard to the proceedings of the said recovery application, the original opponent in the application (i.e. present respondent) filed application Exh. 7 and raised preliminary objection against





















































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top