M/s.Schindler India Pvt.Ltd. vs The Director In charge ESIC and ors Advocate - Uttara Sawant — 54/2023
Case under Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 Section 75-76. Status: Hearing below Exh._______. Next hearing: 06th May 2026.
Application ESI
CNR: MHIC010010942023
Next Hearing
06th May 2026
Filing Number
1105/2023
Filing Date
28-08-2023
Registration No
54/2023
Registration Date
29-08-2023
Court
Industrial Court, Mumbai
Judge
2-Member
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
M/s.Schindler India Pvt.Ltd.
Adv. Mathew Abraham
Respondent(s)
The Director In charge ESIC and ors Advocate - Uttara Sawant
Shri.Nischal Kumar Nag
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Member
Hearing below Exh._______
Hearing below Exh._______
Hearing below Exh._______
Hearing below Exh._______
Hearing below Exh._______
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Hearing below Exh._______ |
| 03-02-2026 | Hearing below Exh._______ |
| 06-01-2026 | Hearing below Exh._______ |
| 04-11-2025 | Hearing below Exh._______ |
| 07-10-2025 | Hearing below Exh._______ |
Interim Orders
Summary The Employees' State Insurance Court at Mumbai allowed the interim relief application filed by Schindler India Pvt. Ltd. against the ESI Corporation's Section 45-A order dated 28/09/2020 that determined a contribution liability of Rs. 2,40,83,580/- for FY 2015-2016. The court stayed the implementation of the disputed order for 9 months after framing issues, finding the applicant made a strong prima-facie case, balance of convenience lay in its favor, and irreparable loss would result without relief. The case was adjourned for filing written statements, with directions to expedite proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Employees' State Insurance Court at Mumbai allowed the interim relief application filed by Schindler India Pvt. Ltd. against the ESI Corporation's Section 45-A order dated 28/09/2020 that determined a contribution liability of Rs. 2,40,83,580/- for FY 2015-2016. The court stayed the implementation of the disputed order for 9 months after framing issues, finding the applicant made a strong prima-facie case, balance of convenience lay in its favor, and irreparable loss would result without relief. The case was adjourned for filing written statements, with directions to expedite proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts