Arvindsinh Umedsinh Jadeja vs Sidhivinayak Enterprise Advocate - J H DATTANI — 2/2026

Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 18th April 2026.

Case disposed

RECO33C2 LC - Recovery 33C (2)

CNR: GJJM130000182026

Filing Number

2/2026

Filing Date

04-Feb-2026

Registration No

2/2026

Registration Date

04-Feb-2026

Court

LABOUR COURT, JAMNAGAR

Judge

2-Judge, Labour Court

Decision Date

18-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 24-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Arvindsinh Umedsinh Jadeja

    Adv. H H DEDA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sidhivinayak Enterprise Advocate - J H DATTANI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: Recovery(C-1) No.02/2026 The court dismissed the case after finding that both parties had reached a settlement. The petitioner (Arvindsinh Umedsinh Jadeja) and respondent (Sidhivinayak Enterprise) had agreed on payment of Rs. 2,51,000, making continued litigation unnecessary. The judgment was disposed of in accordance with the settlement terms reached between the parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Judge, Labour Court

  4. 09-Apr-2026

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  5. 27-Mar-2026

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  6. 20-Mar-2026

    For Notice Serve to opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  7. 13-Mar-2026

    For Notice Serve to opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  8. 05-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 04-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Recovery(C-1) No.02/2026 The court dismissed the case after finding that both parties had reached a settlement. The petitioner (Arvindsinh Umedsinh Jadeja) and respondent (Sidhivinayak Enterprise) had agreed on payment of Rs. 2,51,000, making continued litigation unnecessary. The judgment was disposed of in accordance with the settlement terms reached between the parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case