Zakaullah Mohd Khalil Khan vs M/s Zaks Supply Chain Pvt. Ltd. — 38/2024
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 33C2. Status: Cross Examination. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.
Appln IDA - Application
CNR: MHLC040004592024
Filing Number
459/2024
Filing Date
09-May-2024
Registration No
38/2024
Registration Date
10-May-2024
Court
Labour Court,Thane
Judge
1-Judge, First Labour Court
Last updated 26-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Zakaullah Mohd Khalil Khan
Adv. UR AKHILESHKUMAR SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.M/s Zaks Supply Chain Pvt. Ltd.
-
2.Mohd. Khalid Usman Khan Director
Case History
-
27-Mar-2026
Next hearingPending
-
06-Mar-2026
Cross Examination
Judge, First Labour Court
-
06-Feb-2026
Cross Examination
Judge, First Labour Court
-
09-Jan-2026
Compliance
I/c Judge
-
05-Dec-2025
Compliance
I/c Judge
-
14-Nov-2025
Compliance
I/c Judge
-
15-Oct-2025
Order on Exh._________
I/c Judge
-
22-Sep-2025
Order on Exh._________
I/c Judge
-
18-Aug-2025
Order below ExhView PDF
-
18-Aug-2025
Order below ExhView PDF
Summary: The Fourth Labour Court, Thane rejected the opponents' application seeking permission to engage an advocate to represent them in the industrial dispute case. The court held that under Section 36(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, legal representation requires both court leave and consent from the other party; since the applicant strongly objected and did not grant consent, the application was denied. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Aug-2025
Say
I/c Judge
-
04-Jul-2025
Say
I/c Judge
-
21-Apr-2025
Say
Judge, Fourth Labour Court
-
24-Mar-2025
Say
Judge, Fourth Labour Court
-
27-Jan-2025
Say
Judge, Fourth Labour Court
-
09-Dec-2024
Say
Judge, Fourth Labour Court
-
07-Oct-2024
Say
Judge, Fourth Labour Court
-
29-Aug-2024
Hearing below Exh.
Judge, Fourth Labour Court
-
29-Jul-2024
Say
Judge, Fourth Labour Court
-
13-May-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-May-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 38/2024
Summary: The Fourth Labour Court, Thane rejected the opponents' application seeking permission to engage an advocate to represent them in the industrial dispute case. The court held that under Section 36(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, legal representation requires both court leave and consent from the other party; since the applicant strongly objected and did not grant consent, the application was denied. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts