Baburao Pandhare vs Vasantdada Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and One Advocate - Mutalik Sandeep Shashikant — 30/2019
Case under Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules - 2009 Section 28. Status: Cross Examination. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.
Complaint ULP
CNR: MHIC100000492019
Next Hearing
27th March 2026
Filing Number
49/2019
Filing Date
12-03-2019
Registration No
30/2019
Registration Date
12-03-2019
Court
Industrial Court ,Sangli
Judge
1-Member, Industrial Court, Sangli
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Baburao Pandhare
Adv. Yadav Dhairyasheel Shamarao
Respondent(s)
Vasantdada Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and One Advocate - Mutalik Sandeep Shashikant
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Member, Industrial Court, Sangli
Cross Examination
Cross Examination
Cross Examination
Cross Examination
Cross Examination
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Cross Examination |
| 18-02-2026 | Cross Examination |
| 28-01-2026 | Cross Examination |
| 16-01-2026 | Cross Examination |
| 12-12-2025 | Cross Examination |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Application Rejected. The Industrial Court, Sangli rejected the respondent's application to amend the written statement in a 2019 unfair labor practice complaint filed by Baburao Pandhare against Vasantdada Sah. Sakhar Karkhana. The court found that the proposed amendments relating to the factory's financial crisis and wage agreements constituted past events that should have been included in the original written statement, and that the respondent failed to diligently pursue the amendment despite having three years to file the written statement and locate relevant documents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Application Rejected. The Industrial Court, Sangli rejected the respondent's application to amend the written statement in a 2019 unfair labor practice complaint filed by Baburao Pandhare against Vasantdada Sah. Sakhar Karkhana. The court found that the proposed amendments relating to the factory's financial crisis and wage agreements constituted past events that should have been included in the original written statement, and that the respondent failed to diligently pursue the amendment despite having three years to file the written statement and locate relevant documents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts