KANUBHAI PUNJABHAI CHAUCHARI vs M.D.SHRI, DENA GUJARAT GRAMIN BANK Advocate - P F JHAVERI — 2/2015

Case under Gujarat Industrial Relation Act, 1946 Section 078. Status: For Evidence of Applicant. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.

CHANGE LC - Application for illegal change

CNR: GJMH140000022015

For Evidence of Applicant

Next Hearing

10th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

2/2015

Filing Date

11-08-2015

Registration No

2/2015

Registration Date

11-08-2015

Court

LABOUR COURT, MAHESANA

Judge

1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT INDUSTRIAL RELATION ACT, 1946 Section 078
IA/1/2016 Classification : Interim Application Section KANUBHAI PUNJABHAI CHAUCHARIM.D.SHRI, DENA GUJARAT GRAMIN BANK

Petitioner(s)

KANUBHAI PUNJABHAI CHAUCHARI

Adv. R K CHAUDHARY

Respondent(s)

M.D.SHRI, DENA GUJARAT GRAMIN BANK Advocate - P F JHAVERI

REZUNAL MANAGER, DENA GUJARAT GRAMIN BANK

BRANCH MANAGER SHRI, DENA GUJARAT GRAMIN BANK

Hearing History

Judge: 1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT

16-03-2026

For Evidence of Applicant

06-03-2026

For Evidence of Applicant

23-02-2026

For Evidence of Applicant

17-02-2026

For Evidence of Applicant

06-02-2026

For Evidence of Applicant

Interim Orders

23-09-2019
ORDER
20-08-2025
ORDER

Summary: The Mehsana Labour Court dismissed the petition filed by Chari Kanubhai Punjabhai under sections 78-79 of the BIR Act against Dena Gujarat Gramin Bank for wrongful termination. The court found that the petitioner failed to substantiate his claims through documentary evidence or affidavit despite multiple opportunities, and did not appear in person to present his case. The petition was dismissed due to lack of evidence and non-appearance of the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Mehsana Labour Court dismissed the petition filed by Chari Kanubhai Punjabhai under sections 78-79 of the BIR Act against Dena Gujarat Gramin Bank for wrongful termination. The court found that the petitioner failed to substantiate his claims through documentary evidence or affidavit despite multiple opportunities, and did not appear in person to present his case. The petition was dismissed due to lack of evidence and non-appearance of the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

LABOUR COURT, MAHESANA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case