Dattatray Pandurang Jadhav and ors.2 vs M/s. Prism Johnson and Ors.3 Advocate - J.V.Mhaske, P.A. Anaokar — 64/2019

Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 Section 28. Status: Cross Examination. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.

Complaint ULP1

CNR: MHIC010002322019

Cross Examination

Next Hearing

27th March 2026

Filing Number

253/2019

Filing Date

18-03-2019

Registration No

64/2019

Registration Date

18-03-2019

Court

Industrial Court, Mumbai

Judge

6-Member

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union And Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 Section 28

Petitioner(s)

Dattatray Pandurang Jadhav and ors.2

Adv. R.R.Yadav

Dilip Shankar Gaikwad

Yashwant Kumar Yadav,

Respondent(s)

M/s. Prism Johnson and Ors.3 Advocate - J.V.Mhaske, P.A. Anaokar

Atil Desai, Director

Shrirang Sondur, General Manager,

Pankaj Shrivastava, HR Manager,

Hearing History

Judge: 6-Member

06-03-2026

Cross Examination

18-02-2026

Cross Examination

03-02-2026

Cross Examination

19-12-2025

Cross Examination

04-11-2025

Cross Examination

Interim Orders

08-01-2020
Order below Exh---

Summary: The Industrial Court of Mumbai allowed the complainants' application to amend their complaint dated January 8, 2020, despite respondents' resistance. The court found the amendment was necessary to decide the real controversy between parties, did not introduce a new cause of action, and caused no prejudice to respondents. The amendment was granted subject to a cost of Rs. 1,500 and complainants were directed to carry out the amendment within the stipulated period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Industrial Court of Mumbai allowed the complainants' application to amend their complaint dated January 8, 2020, despite respondents' resistance. The court found the amendment was necessary to decide the real controversy between parties, did not introduce a new cause of action, and caused no prejudice to respondents. The amendment was granted subject to a cost of Rs. 1,500 and complainants were directed to carry out the amendment within the stipulated period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Industrial Court, Mumbai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case