Ranjitbhai Vitthalbhai Solanki vs Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Lmited Advocate - M.G.Memon — 148/2024

JudegementView PDF

Summary The court ruled that the worker (appellant) was not a direct employee of the principal employer (Defendant No. 1) but rather worked through a contractor (Defendant No. 2). Since no master-servant relationship existed between the worker and principal employer, the worker was not entitled to reinstatement. However, the court awarded the worker Rs. 50,000 as compensation in lieu of lost wages and other benefits as an alternative remedy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Disposed

Judge, Labour Court

For award

Judge, Labour Court

For Argument of Second party

Judge, Labour Court

For Evidence of Second party

Judge, Labour Court

For Evidence of Second party

Judge, Labour Court

For Evidence of Second party

Judge, Labour Court

For Evidence of Second party

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

For Written Statement

Judge, Labour Court

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled

Case filed

Registration No. 148/2024