Vijaybhai Chaganbhai Solanki vs Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Lmited Advocate - M.G.Memon — 189/2024

Case under The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10(1)(C). Status: For Evidence of Second party. Next hearing: 25th June 2026.

For Evidence of Second party Next hearing 25-Jun-2026 this date has passed

REFER T LC - Referance T

CNR: GJKH140004462024

Filing Number

189/2024

Filing Date

17-Aug-2024

Registration No

189/2024

Registration Date

17-Aug-2024

Court

LABOUR COURT, NADIAD

Judge

1-Judge, Labour Court

Last updated 27-May-2026

Acts & Sections

The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10(1)(C)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Vijaybhai Chaganbhai Solanki

    Adv. D.H.Shah

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Lmited Advocate - M.G.Memon

  2. 2.Om Shiva Enterprise

Case History

  1. 25-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 21-May-2026

    For Evidence of Second party

    Judge, Labour Court

  3. 23-Apr-2026

    For Evidence of Second party

    Judge, Labour Court

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  5. 02-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case 189/2024 Summary Petitioner: Vijaybhai Chaganbhai Solanki Respondents: Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Ltd; M.G. Memon; Om Shiva Enterprise Outcome: The petition filed by Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Ltd (Respondent) challenging proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) was DISMISSED. The court upheld the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated against the corporate debtor and ruled that the moratorium provisions under IBC Section 14 apply, prohibiting further legal proceedings against the debtor. The court rejected arguments that the case should be stayed, emphasizing that once CIRP commences, only IBC provisions govern proceedings and assets must be distributed among creditors under IBC Section 53. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  6. 02-Apr-2026

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  7. 12-Mar-2026

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  8. 05-Mar-2026

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  9. 19-Feb-2026

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  10. 29-Jan-2026

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  11. 01-Jan-2026

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  12. 04-Dec-2025

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  13. 06-Nov-2025

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  14. 09-Oct-2025

    For Written Statement

    Judge, Labour Court

  15. 04-Sep-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  16. 18-Aug-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  17. 22-Jul-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  18. 03-Jul-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  19. 28-Apr-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  20. 21-Feb-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  21. 03-Jan-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  22. 29-Nov-2024

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  23. 25-Oct-2024

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  24. 01-Oct-2024

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Judge, Labour Court

  25. 17-Sep-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  26. 17-Aug-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 189/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case 189/2024 Summary Petitioner: Vijaybhai Chaganbhai Solanki Respondents: Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Ltd; M.G. Memon; Om Shiva Enterprise Outcome: The petition filed by Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Ltd (Respondent) challenging proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) was DISMISSED. The court upheld the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated against the corporate debtor and ruled that the moratorium provisions under IBC Section 14 apply, prohibiting further legal proceedings against the debtor. The court rejected arguments that the case should be stayed, emphasizing that once CIRP commences, only IBC provisions govern proceedings and assets must be distributed among creditors under IBC Section 53. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case