Natubhai Aashabhai Solanki vs Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Lmited Advocate - M.G.Memon — 203/2024
Case under 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: GJKH140004822024
Next Hearing
25th June 2026
Filing Number
203/2024
Filing Date
03-09-2024
Registration No
203/2024
Registration Date
03-09-2024
Court
LABOUR COURT, NADIAD
Judge
1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Natubhai Aashabhai Solanki
Adv. Dharmesh 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: 203/2024 Natubhai Aashabhai Solanki v. Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Ltd & Others The petitioner's reference case seeking to set aside an Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) tribunal order was dismissed. The court held that once a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) is initiated under the IBC, a moratorium under Section 14 prohibits all proceedings against the corporate debtor in other forums. The petitioner, a trade union representing workers owed unpaid wages since 2018, cannot pursue separate legal action when the company is already undergoing CIRP proceedings where worker claims have been admitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 203/2024 Natubhai Aashabhai Solanki v. Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Ltd & Others The petitioner's reference case seeking to set aside an Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) tribunal order was dismissed. The court held that once a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) is initiated under the IBC, a moratorium under Section 14 prohibits all proceedings against the corporate debtor in other forums. The petitioner, a trade union representing workers owed unpaid wages since 2018, cannot pursue separate legal action when the company is already undergoing CIRP proceedings where worker claims have been admitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts