V.Arul vs The Management, Matherson Automotive Technologies and Engineering Advocate - Mr.M. Kandasamy, Mr.P. Ashok Kumar — 17/2021
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 2A(2). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 13th May 2026.
ID - Industrial Disputes
CNR: TNKP180001332021
Filing Number
133/2021
Filing Date
12-03-2021
Registration No
17/2021
Registration Date
18-03-2021
Court
Labour Court, Kancheepuram
Judge
1-Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kancheepuram
Decision Date
13th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
V.Arul
Adv. S.Kumarasamy, K.Bharathi, K.Suresh, J.Mohan Raj
Respondent(s)
The Management, Matherson Automotive Technologies and Engineering Advocate - Mr.M. Kandasamy, Mr.P. Ashok Kumar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kancheepuram
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 22-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 16-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 06-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 27-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Case 17/2021 (V. Arul vs. Motherson Automotive Technologies & Engineering) The Labour Court rejected V. Arul's claim for reinstatement with back wages following his termination during probation, but awarded him and eight co-workers Rs. 75,000 each as compensation. The court found the employer failed to produce performance appraisals or documentation to justify the poor performance claim and did not follow fair procedures, yet upheld the termination as valid under the certified standing orders permitting dismissal during probation without notice or stated reason. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 17/2021 (V. Arul vs. Motherson Automotive Technologies & Engineering) The Labour Court rejected V. Arul's claim for reinstatement with back wages following his termination during probation, but awarded him and eight co-workers Rs. 75,000 each as compensation. The court found the employer failed to produce performance appraisals or documentation to justify the poor performance claim and did not follow fair procedures, yet upheld the termination as valid under the certified standing orders permitting dismissal during probation without notice or stated reason. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts