ASHVIN HETALSINH CHAVDA vs CARGO MOTORS PVT. LTD. MAHESANA Advocate - V M GOSWAMI — 7/2013

Case under Employees Compensation Act, 1923 Section 010. Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 07th March 2026.

WC NFATAL L - W.C. Application Non Fatal

CNR: GJMH140001752013

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

7/2013

Filing Date

14-10-2013

Registration No

7/2013

Registration Date

14-10-2013

Court

LABOUR COURT, MAHESANA

Judge

1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT

Decision Date

07th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED

Acts & Sections

EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, 1923 Section 010

Petitioner(s)

ASHVIN HETALSINH CHAVDA

Adv. H R BHAVSAR

Respondent(s)

CARGO MOTORS PVT. LTD. MAHESANA Advocate - V M GOSWAMI

CARGO MOTORS PVT LTD

Adv. V M GOSWAMI

CARGO MOTORS PVT LTD

Adv. V M GOSWAMI

M/S. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY

Adv. S G SHAH

Hearing History

Judge: 1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT

07-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

For Order

27-02-2026

For Arguement of Applicant

04-02-2026

For Arguement of Applicant

28-01-2026

For Evidence of opponent

Final Orders / Judgements

07-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The court partially approved the worker's compensation claim, directing the insurance company (Defendant No. 4) to pay ₹2,20,535 to the injured worker Ashvinsingh Hetalsingh Chavda for a workplace accident on October 21, 2011, where he suffered 54.4% permanent disability. The court rejected claims for medical expenses, interest, and penalty, finding no legal basis for these under the applicable law at the time of the accident. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

09-10-2023
ORDER
casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court partially approved the worker's compensation claim, directing the insurance company (Defendant No. 4) to pay ₹2,20,535 to the injured worker Ashvinsingh Hetalsingh Chavda for a workplace accident on October 21, 2011, where he suffered 54.4% permanent disability. The court rejected claims for medical expenses, interest, and penalty, finding no legal basis for these under the applicable law at the time of the accident. 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