U.B.YOGESH, DRIVER-CUM-CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.125, CHIKKAMAGALUR UNIT. vs The Divisional Controller KSRTC Chikkamagalur Division Chikkamagalur — 44/2025

Case under Industrial Disputes Act Section 10-1-d. Disposed: Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH on 14th March 2026.

Ref. - Reference u/s 10-1-d of ID Act

CNR: KAMS060000492025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

44/2025

Filing Date

02-04-2025

Registration No

44/2025

Registration Date

02-04-2025

Court

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL COURT, MYSURU

Judge

618-Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal Mysore

Decision Date

14th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH

Acts & Sections

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT Section 10-1-d

Petitioner(s)

U.B.YOGESH, DRIVER-CUM-CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.125, CHIKKAMAGALUR UNIT.

Respondent(s)

The Divisional Controller KSRTC Chikkamagalur Division Chikkamagalur

Hearing History

Judge: 618-Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal Mysore

14-03-2026

Disposed

07-03-2026

RESERVED FOR AWARD

12-02-2026

EVIDENCE

08-01-2026

EVIDENCE

08-12-2025

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

08-12-2025
Issue
12-02-2026
Deposition

The court (Industrial Tribunal, Mysore) recorded the testimony of the second party's witness on 12.02.2026, admitted various documentary evidence (marked as Exhibits M-1 through M-21), and found the inquiry to be conducted fairly and justly. The first party's counsel was given adequate time to cross-examine the witness, and no further examination was required; the court concluded that the proceedings were conducted in accordance with proper legal procedures. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court (Industrial Tribunal, Mysore) recorded the testimony of the second party's witness on 12.02.2026, admitted various documentary evidence (marked as Exhibits M-1 through M-21), and found the inquiry to be conducted fairly and justly. The first party's counsel was given adequate time to cross-examine the witness, and no further examination was required; the court concluded that the proceedings were conducted in accordance with proper legal procedures. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL COURT, MYSURU All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case