Madhukar Gajajnan Kadam vs Managing Director, Vasantdada Shetkari Sah. Sakhar Karkhana and other Advocate - Mutalik Sandeep Shashikant — 14/2019

Case under Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules - 2009 Section 9 &10. Status: Hearing below Exh._______. Next hearing: 08th April 2026.

Complaint ULP

CNR: MHIC100000292019

Hearing below Exh._______

Next Hearing

08th April 2026

Filing Number

29/2019

Filing Date

26-02-2019

Registration No

14/2019

Registration Date

26-02-2019

Court

Industrial Court ,Sangli

Judge

1-Member, Industrial Court, Sangli

Acts & Sections

Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules - 2009 Section 9 &10

Petitioner(s)

Madhukar Gajajnan Kadam

Adv. Yadav Dhairyasheel Shamarao

Respondent(s)

Managing Director, Vasantdada Shetkari Sah. Sakhar Karkhana and other Advocate - Mutalik Sandeep Shashikant

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Member, Industrial Court, Sangli

18-03-2026

Hearing below Exh._______

06-03-2026

Hearing below Exh._______

18-02-2026

Hearing below Exh._______

28-01-2026

Hearing below Exh._______

08-01-2026

Hearing below Exh._______

Interim Orders

25-04-2022
Copy of Judgment

Summary The Industrial Court (Member Court, Sangli) partially granted the complainant's applications for document production dated 25th April 2022. The court rejected the demand for wage registers, bonus registers, and leave registers (2003-2020) as irrelevant to the actual claims, but allowed and directed the respondents to produce the tripartite agreement dated 04/07/2017 between Respondent No.1, Respondent No.2, and Sangli DCC Bank, finding it necessary to determine liability regarding the complainant's retention allowance claim. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Industrial Court (Member Court, Sangli) partially granted the complainant's applications for document production dated 25th April 2022. The court rejected the demand for wage registers, bonus registers, and leave registers (2003-2020) as irrelevant to the actual claims, but allowed and directed the respondents to produce the tripartite agreement dated 04/07/2017 between Respondent No.1, Respondent No.2, and Sangli DCC Bank, finding it necessary to determine liability regarding the complainant's retention allowance claim. 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 ,Sangli All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case