STYLAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED vs AMIT KUMAR AND OTHERS — CWP/32983/2025

Disposed: --DISMISSED on 14th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 12-May-2026

CNR: PHHC011790602025

e-Filing Number

04-11-2025

Filing Number

CWP/69754/2025

Filing Date

04-Nov-2025

Registration No

CWP/32983/2025

Registration Date

04-Nov-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Coram

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Bench Type

Single

Category

18.5 - LABOUR ( 452 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

14-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.STYLAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED

    Adv. PRASHANT KUMAR KAPILA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AMIT KUMAR AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Kuldeep TiwariView PDF

    Summary: CWP/32983/2025 - Stylam Industries Limited v. Amit Kumar The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed both writ petitions filed by Stylam Industries Limited as withdrawn on 14.05.2026. The court found that the company had filed two identical petitions challenging the same Industrial Tribunal award (dated 15.07.2025) in favor of workman Amit Kumar, appearing to adopt fraudulent means to secure interim relief after the first petition was denied. The court accepted the company's unconditional apology and permitted withdrawal, but ordered it to pay Rs. 50,000 to the workman as litigation expenses within 15 days, with liberty to revive the petitions upon default. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/32983/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: CWP/32983/2025 - Stylam Industries Limited v. Amit Kumar The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed both writ petitions filed by Stylam Industries Limited as withdrawn on 14.05.2026. The court found that the company had filed two identical petitions challenging the same Industrial Tribunal award (dated 15.07.2025) in favor of workman Amit Kumar, appearing to adopt fraudulent means to secure interim relief after the first petition was denied. The court accepted the company's unconditional apology and permitted withdrawal, but ordered it to pay Rs. 50,000 to the workman as litigation expenses within 15 days, with liberty to revive the petitions upon default. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case