SMT. NIRMALABEN VALLABHBHAI SOLANKI vs FACTORY MANAGER, GARDEN SILK MILS LTD Advocate - U S TRIVEDI — 26/2024

Case under Gujarat Industrial Relation Act, 1946 Section 84. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 22nd May 2026.

Case disposed

MISCAPP-IC - MISC. APPLICATION (I.C.)

CNR: GJSR130000932024

Filing Number

26/2024

Filing Date

20-Jun-2024

Registration No

26/2024

Registration Date

20-Jun-2024

Court

INDUSTRIAL COURT, SURAT

Judge

2-Member, Industrial Court

Decision Date

22-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Last updated 31-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat Industrial Relation Act, 1946 Section 84

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SMT. NIRMALABEN VALLABHBHAI SOLANKI

    Adv. S.T.CHAUDHARI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.FACTORY MANAGER, GARDEN SILK MILS LTD Advocate - U S TRIVEDI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 22-May-2026

    Judegement

    CASE SUMMARY: 26/2024 The Industrial Court of Surat granted Smt. Nirmalaben Vallabhbhai Solanki's application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 84(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The petitioner had delayed filing her appeal by 17 days (or 77 days from the judgment date) against a March 4, 2024 labor court order in Original T-case 847/1993. The court found the delay was not willful or intentional—it arose because the petitioner's union's address appeared on the original application, so she did not receive the court's certified copy initially. Once she obtained it in April 2024, financial hardship and need for legal consultation caused further delay. The court applied equitable principles prioritizing substantive justice over technical grounds, holding that no bad faith delay occurred and condoning the delay to allow merit-based adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 22-May-2026

    Disposed

    Member, Industrial Court

  4. 08-May-2026

    Judgement

    Member, Industrial Court

  5. 07-May-2026

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  6. 01-May-2026

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  7. 10-Apr-2026

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  8. 09-Apr-2026

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  9. 04-Apr-2026

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  10. 13-Mar-2026

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  11. 13-Feb-2026

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  12. 16-Jan-2026

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  13. 19-Dec-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  14. 21-Nov-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  15. 03-Oct-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  16. 12-Sep-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  17. 25-Jul-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  18. 27-Jun-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  19. 02-May-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  20. 05-Apr-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  21. 04-Apr-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  22. 28-Feb-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  23. 24-Jan-2025

    Reply

    Member, Industrial Court

  24. 27-Dec-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    Member, Industrial Court

  25. 29-Nov-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    Member, Industrial Court

  26. 11-Oct-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    Member, Industrial Court

  27. 23-Aug-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    Member, Industrial Court

  28. 26-Jul-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  29. 20-Jun-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 26/2024

casestatus.in Summary

CASE SUMMARY: 26/2024 The Industrial Court of Surat granted Smt. Nirmalaben Vallabhbhai Solanki's application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 84(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The petitioner had delayed filing her appeal by 17 days (or 77 days from the judgment date) against a March 4, 2024 labor court order in Original T-case 847/1993. The court found the delay was not willful or intentional—it arose because the petitioner's union's address appeared on the original application, so she did not receive the court's certified copy initially. Once she obtained it in April 2024, financial hardship and need for legal consultation caused further delay. The court applied equitable principles prioritizing substantive justice over technical grounds, holding that no bad faith delay occurred and condoning the delay to allow merit-based adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case