S.A.Shoban Babu vs The Management, Motherson Automotive Technologies and Engineering, Advocate - Mr.M. Kandasamy, Mr.P. Ashok Kumar — 39/2021
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 2A(2). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 14th May 2026.
ID - Industrial Disputes
CNR: TNKP180001552021
Filing Number
155/2021
Filing Date
12-03-2021
Registration No
39/2021
Registration Date
19-03-2021
Court
Labour Court, Kancheepuram
Judge
1-Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kancheepuram
Decision Date
14th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
S.A.Shoban Babu
Adv. Mr.S.Kumarasamy, Mr.K.Bharathi, Mr.K.Suresh
Respondent(s)
The Management, Motherson Automotive Technologies and Engineering, Advocate - Mr.M. Kandasamy, Mr.P. Ashok Kumar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kancheepuram
Disposed
Judgement
Judgement
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-05-2026 | Judgement |
| 22-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 16-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 06-04-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Case 39/2021 (S.A. Shoban Babu v. Motherson Automotive Technologies & Engineering) The Labour Court rejected the petitioner's claim for reinstatement with full back wages, instead awarding lump-sum compensation of Rs.40,000. The court found the termination during probation was technically permissible under the certified standing orders, but the employer failed to produce credible evidence of unsatisfactory performance—such as performance appraisals or disciplinary warnings—to justify the dismissal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 39/2021 (S.A. Shoban Babu v. Motherson Automotive Technologies & Engineering) The Labour Court rejected the petitioner's claim for reinstatement with full back wages, instead awarding lump-sum compensation of Rs.40,000. The court found the termination during probation was technically permissible under the certified standing orders, but the employer failed to produce credible evidence of unsatisfactory performance—such as performance appraisals or disciplinary warnings—to justify the dismissal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts