Shri. Suresh Gupta vs M/s Shri. Ganesh Vyapar Udyog — 78/2023

Case under Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules - 2009 Section 28. Status: Appearance. Next hearing: 17th April 2026.

Complaint ULP

CNR: MHIC040001552023

Appearance

Next Hearing

17th April 2026

Filing Number

173/2023

Filing Date

20-04-2023

Registration No

78/2023

Registration Date

20-04-2023

Court

Industrial Court,Thane

Judge

2-Member

Acts & Sections

Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules - 2009 Section 28

Petitioner(s)

Shri. Suresh Gupta

Adv. U.R. S. K. Shinde

shri vias Urare

Sandesh Patel

Ratnakumar

Arvind Bhai Dhoni

Rajendra Ray

Neeta

Ramesh Sonya

Ramila Madhy

Ramila Arvind

Kala

Lakham

Rajesh Varma

Respondent(s)

M/s Shri. Ganesh Vyapar Udyog

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Member

06-03-2026

Appearance

16-01-2026

Appearance

02-01-2026

Appearance

05-12-2025

Appearance

31-10-2025

Appearance

Interim Orders

07-07-2023
Order Below Exh.

Summary The Industrial Court of Maharashtra at Thane rejected the interim relief application filed by 13 workers against their employers under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. The workers alleged unfair labor practices and sought to restrain the company from removing plant and machinery to secure their unpaid wages, gratuity, and closure compensation. However, the court found no prima facie case due to lack of documentary evidence establishing the employer-employee relationship (only 4 employees were documented in EPF records versus 13 claiming status), and held that the secured creditor bank's SARFAESI Act rights took priority over unsecured employee claims absent a specific undertaking like in prior Supreme Court precedents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Industrial Court of Maharashtra at Thane rejected the interim relief application filed by 13 workers against their employers under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. The workers alleged unfair labor practices and sought to restrain the company from removing plant and machinery to secure their unpaid wages, gratuity, and closure compensation. However, the court found no prima facie case due to lack of documentary evidence establishing the employer-employee relationship (only 4 employees were documented in EPF records versus 13 claiming status), and held that the secured creditor bank's SARFAESI Act rights took priority over unsecured employee claims absent a specific undertaking like in prior Supreme Court precedents. 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 Court,Thane All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case