Bhimrao Maruti Tadakhe vs Managing Director Shri Tatyasaheb Kore Warna S S K Ltd., Advocate - D. S. Joshi — 7/2024
Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 Section 28. Status: Respondent Evidence. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.
Comp. ULP - Complaint
CNR: MHLC090001212024
Next Hearing
27th March 2026
Filing Number
125/2024
Filing Date
18-03-2024
Registration No
7/2024
Registration Date
18-03-2024
Court
Labour Court, Kolhapur
Judge
2-Judge, Labour Court No. 2 Kolhapur.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Bhimrao Maruti Tadakhe
Adv. P. R. Rane
Respondent(s)
Managing Director Shri Tatyasaheb Kore Warna S S K Ltd., Advocate - D. S. Joshi
Shri Tatyasaheb Kore Warna S S K Ltd.,
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Judge, Labour Court No. 2 Kolhapur.
Respondent Evidence
Respondent Evidence
Respondent Evidence
Respondent Evidence
Respondent Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Respondent Evidence |
| 13-03-2026 | Respondent Evidence |
| 06-03-2026 | Respondent Evidence |
| 20-02-2026 | Respondent Evidence |
| 30-01-2026 | Respondent Evidence |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY: The petition is dismissed in full. The petitioner's claims regarding injury compensation, medical reimbursement of Rs. 22,491, and other employment-related grievances against the workplace were rejected due to insufficient evidence and lack of proper documentation. The court found that the petitioner failed to provide medical certificates, could not substantiate claims through the employer, and did not produce required legal documentation to support the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The petition is dismissed in full. The petitioner's claims regarding injury compensation, medical reimbursement of Rs. 22,491, and other employment-related grievances against the workplace were rejected due to insufficient evidence and lack of proper documentation. The court found that the petitioner failed to provide medical certificates, could not substantiate claims through the employer, and did not produce required legal documentation to support the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts