Back
NIRZAR S. DESAI
Huntsman International (India) Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Dharmendrakumar Dubey – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Learned advocate Mr. Gandhi tenders a draft amendment. The same is taken on record and granted.
2. Necessary amendment be carried out forthwith. The amendment reads as under:-
(earlier known as Huntsman Performance Products
(India) Pvt. Ltd.)
Having its registered Officer at:
6th Floor, B Wing, Marwah Centre,
Krishanlal Larwah Marg,
Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400072
And also at:
Plot No. 321, G. I.D.C.,
Panoli,
Taluka Ankleshwar,
Dist. Bharuch.”
3. In view of the above amendment, the petition which was earlier filed in the name of Huntsman Performance Products International (India) Pvt. Ltd. would now be known as Indorama Ventures Oxides Ankleshwar Pvt. Ltd.. However, for the purpose of clarity and convenience, in the entire order the petitioner is referred to as Huntsman Performance Products International (India) Pvt. Ltd.
4. By way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 13.12.2017 passed by the Labour Court No.1, Bharuch in Review Application No. 1 of 2017.
5. Heard learned advocate Mr. Keyur Gandhi for learned advocate
The Labour Court's jurisdiction is limited to the terms of reference, and it may determine the issue of whether an individual is a 'workman' as defined in law within that framework.
The court ruled that under the Industrial Disputes Act, the petitioner could withdraw an improperly referenced case to ensure due process, affirming the need for correct identification in legal proce....
The court emphasized the power of the tribunal to regulate its own procedure and the principle that technical and procedural lapses should not hinder substantial justice.
The legal review process is constrained to errors apparent on the record, and cannot be used to challenge substantive issues decided in an earlier ruling.
Delay in filing a reference does not preclude adjudication on merits, especially when the dispute remains alive.
The ad judicatory authorities under the Industrial Disputes Act are not bound by the technical rules of procedure as in civil actions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the employer must follow the relevant provisions of the I.D. Act before terminating the service of an employee, and failure to do so may entit....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act can only be considered a dispute if a specific demand has been made by the workmen, and any refere....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
