VARMA GAJENDRA KHEMCHANDDAS vs THE ARVIND LTD. Advocate - B K OZA — 51/2024
Case under Gujarat Industrial Relation Act, 1946 Section 79,1. Status: For Evidence of Applicant. Next hearing: 03rd April 2026.
TAPP LC - Application for Termination
CNR: GJGN060002352024
Next Hearing
03rd April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
51/2024
Filing Date
03-07-2024
Registration No
51/2024
Registration Date
03-07-2024
Court
LABOUR COURT, KALOL
Judge
1-JUDGE LABOUR COURT KALOL
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
VARMA GAJENDRA KHEMCHANDDAS
Adv. A N PATEL
Respondent(s)
THE ARVIND LTD. Advocate - B K OZA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JUDGE LABOUR COURT KALOL
For Evidence of Applicant
For Evidence of Applicant
For Evidence of Applicant
For Evidence of Applicant
For Evidence of Applicant
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | For Evidence of Applicant | |
| 06-02-2026 | For Evidence of Applicant | |
| 09-01-2026 | For Evidence of Applicant | |
| 20-12-2025 | For Evidence of Applicant | |
| 15-11-2025 | For Evidence of Applicant |
Interim Orders
Summary The Kalol Labour Court rejected an interim application (No. 51-2024) filed under the Gujarat Industrial Relations Act, 1946, Section 119(D), wherein the worker sought 75% subsistence allowance during the pendency of the main case challenging his dismissal. The court held that interim relief granting final wages during the pendency of proceedings is legally impermissible and dismissed the application, finding no prima facie case established and no balance of convenience favoring the worker. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Kalol Labour Court rejected an interim application (No. 51-2024) filed under the Gujarat Industrial Relations Act, 1946, Section 119(D), wherein the worker sought 75% subsistence allowance during the pendency of the main case challenging his dismissal. The court held that interim relief granting final wages during the pendency of proceedings is legally impermissible and dismissed the application, finding no prima facie case established and no balance of convenience favoring the worker. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts