Ghnshyambhai Kantibhai Parmar vs Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Lmited Advocate - M.G.Memon — 184/2024
Case under The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10(1)(C). Status: For Evidence of Second party. Next hearing: 25th June 2026.
REFER T LC - Referance T
CNR: GJKH140004412024
Next Hearing
25th June 2026
Filing Number
184/2024
Filing Date
17-08-2024
Registration No
184/2024
Registration Date
17-08-2024
Court
LABOUR COURT, NADIAD
Judge
1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ghnshyambhai Kantibhai Parmar
Adv. D.H.Shah
Respondent(s)
Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Lmited Advocate - M.G.Memon
Om Shiva Enterprise
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT
For Evidence of Second party
For Evidence of Second party
For Written Statement
For Written Statement
For Written Statement
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 21-05-2026 | For Evidence of Second party |
| 23-04-2026 | For Evidence of Second party |
| 06-04-2026 | For Written Statement |
| 02-04-2026 | For Written Statement |
| 12-03-2026 | For Written Statement |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 184/2024 Petitioner: Ghnshyambhai Kantibhai Parmar Respondent: Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Limited & Om Shiva Enterprise Outcome: The petition filed by Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Limited was dismissed. The court rejected the respondent's arguments that the reference case lacked merit, finding that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Section 14 moratorium provisions override other laws and that the corporate debtor must proceed through the insolvency resolution process. The petitioner's plea regarding reference to the National Tribunal was also rejected. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 184/2024 Petitioner: Ghnshyambhai Kantibhai Parmar Respondent: Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Limited & Om Shiva Enterprise Outcome: The petition filed by Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Limited was dismissed. The court rejected the respondent's arguments that the reference case lacked merit, finding that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Section 14 moratorium provisions override other laws and that the corporate debtor must proceed through the insolvency resolution process. The petitioner's plea regarding reference to the National Tribunal was also rejected. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts