PRADIP LALUPRASAD vs VAISHALI SILK MILLS PVT. LTD. Advocate - H.M.DESAI — 64/2019
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 33C(2). Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 24th April 2026.
RECO33C2-LC - RECOVERY 33C (2)
CNR: GJSR140014242019
Filing Number
64/2019
Filing Date
13-May-2019
Registration No
64/2019
Registration Date
13-May-2019
Court
LABOUR COURT, SURAT
Judge
2-Judge, Labour Court
Decision Date
24-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
Last updated 31-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.PRADIP LALUPRASAD
Adv. DIPAKBHAI K. PIPRODIYA
Respondent(s)
-
1.VAISHALI SILK MILLS PVT. LTD. Advocate - H.M.DESAI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
24-Apr-2026
Judegement
Case Summary: Recovery Case 64/2019 Court Decision: The court partially allowed the petitioner Pradip Laluprasad's recovery petition against Vaishali Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. The court found that the petitioner was unlawfully terminated from employment on May 26, 2008, and awarded him unpaid wages at 30% of the full amount for the period from May 26, 2008, to March 31, 2019, along with 6% simple interest and case costs of Rs. 1,500. Key Reasoning: The court determined that the petitioner was a permanent employee of the respondent company and was illegally dismissed without notice or opportunity to be heard, violating principles of natural justice and the Industrial Disputes Act. Since the respondent failed to provide contrary evidence and the petitioner substantiated his claims through affidavit, the court upheld the petitioner's entitlement to recover outstanding wages. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Apr-2026
Disposed
Judge, Labour Court
-
03-Apr-2026
For Order
Judge, Labour Court
-
13-Mar-2026
For Arguement of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
13-Feb-2026
For Arguement of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
23-Jan-2026
For Arguement of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
16-Jan-2026
For Arguement of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court
-
26-Dec-2025
For Evidence of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
05-Dec-2025
For Evidence of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
21-Nov-2025
For Evidence of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
07-Nov-2025
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court
-
19-Sep-2025
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court
-
22-Aug-2025
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court
-
18-Jul-2025
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court
-
09-Jun-2025
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
05-May-2025
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
24-Mar-2025
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
17-Feb-2025
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
20-Jan-2025
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
23-Dec-2024
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
25-Nov-2024
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
04-Nov-2024
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
14-Oct-2024
For Evidence of Applicant
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
23-Sep-2024
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
29-Jul-2024
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
24-Jun-2024
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
29-Apr-2024
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
11-Mar-2024
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
05-Feb-2024
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
08-Jan-2024
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
04-Dec-2023
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
06-Nov-2023
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
11-Sep-2023
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
24-Jul-2023
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
12-Jun-2023
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court (Jd)
-
21-Apr-2023
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
13-Mar-2023
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
27-Jan-2023
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
26-Dec-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
11-Nov-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
15-Oct-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
01-Oct-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
03-Sep-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
20-Jul-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
17-Jun-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
13-May-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
30-Mar-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
14-Feb-2022
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
31-Dec-2021
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
23-Nov-2021
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
07-Oct-2021
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
17-Aug-2021
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
14-Jul-2021
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
03-Jun-2021
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
13-May-2021
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
22-Apr-2021
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
20-Feb-2021
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
19-Dec-2020
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
26-Oct-2020
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
05-Sep-2020
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
23-Jul-2020
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
25-Jun-2020
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
16-Apr-2020
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
05-Mar-2020
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
30-Jan-2020
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
14-Dec-2019
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
04-Nov-2019
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
27-Sep-2019
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
16-Aug-2019
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
12-Jul-2019
For Reply of opponent
Judge, Labour Court
-
17-Jun-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
13-May-2019
Case filed
Registration No. 64/2019
Case Summary: Recovery Case 64/2019 Court Decision: The court partially allowed the petitioner Pradip Laluprasad's recovery petition against Vaishali Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. The court found that the petitioner was unlawfully terminated from employment on May 26, 2008, and awarded him unpaid wages at 30% of the full amount for the period from May 26, 2008, to March 31, 2019, along with 6% simple interest and case costs of Rs. 1,500. Key Reasoning: The court determined that the petitioner was a permanent employee of the respondent company and was illegally dismissed without notice or opportunity to be heard, violating principles of natural justice and the Industrial Disputes Act. Since the respondent failed to provide contrary evidence and the petitioner substantiated his claims through affidavit, the court upheld the petitioner's entitlement to recover outstanding wages. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts