Central Government Industrial Tribunal
Sh. K. Mani vs Kotak Mahindra on 10 September 2024
THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
CUM LABOUR COURT DELHI - 1
ROOM NO.207, ROUSE AVENUE COURT COMPLEX, NEW DELHI.
ID No. 185/2017
Sh. K. Mani S/o Sh. Kandraswami,
Represented by Karamkar Ekta Kendra,
A-704, Transit Camp, Saheed Rajiv Gandhi Colony, Govindpuri, Kalkaji, New Delhi – 110019.
Workman…
Versus
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Kotak Mahindra, Old Natural Life Insurance Ltd., Unit No. E-2B, E2C(UGC), Himalaya House, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001.
2. M/s Man Machine Solutions Ltd., 143-A, Pocket M, DDA Janta Flats, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi-110044. Management…
AWARD
In the present case, a reference was received from the appropriate Government vide letter No-L-12012/87/2016 (IR(B-I)) dated 27.06.2017 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Act, for adjudication of a dispute, terms of which are as under: The Schedule “Whether the action of the management of M/s Man Machine (P) Ltd., Working in the premises of Kotak Life Insurance Ltd., in terminating the workman Sh. K. Mani, is fair and legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from what date?”
2. In the reference order, the appropriate Government commanded the parties raising the dispute to file statement of claim, complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses with this Tribunal within 15 days of receipt of the reference order and to forward a copy of such statement of claim to the opposite parties involved in the dispute. Claim statement filed, rebuttal written statement filed on behalf of the management no. 2.
3. Management No.1 is not appearing since long therefore they are proceeded ex-parte. Thereafter, issues were framed. Case was listed for claimant evidence on 18.07.2019. After that, claimant evidence was also filed. And after that, none appeared on behalf of the claimant nor his A/R appeared despite providing a number of opportunities, claimant have not appeared to substantiate his claim.
4. Since the workman has neither put in his appearance nor he led any evidence so as to prove his cause against the management, this Tribunal is left with no choice, except to pass a ‘No Dispute/Claim’ award. Let this award be sent to the appropriate Government, as required under Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for publication.
Justice Vikas Kunvar Srivastava Retired Judge, Allahabad High Court
Presiding Officer Date: 10.09.2024