Gujarat High Court High Court

Satyanarayan vs Kadu on 18 February, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Satyanarayan vs Kadu on 18 February, 2011
Author: K.M.Thaker,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/7678/2010	 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7678 of 2010
 

 
 
=================================================


 

SATYANARAYAN
STEEL INDUSTRIES - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

KADU
MOHMMEDBHAI - Respondent(s)
 

=================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
KISHOR M PAUL for Petitioner(s) : 1, 
RULE SERVED BY DS for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
=================================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
		
	

 

Date
: 18/02/2011  
ORAL ORDER

Mr.

Paul, learned advocate for the petitioner, had made a mention at
11.00 a.m. in respect of present petition, which is not listed in
today’s cause list. He made a mention that an amicable settlement has
been arrived at between the parties, which, he desires to place on
record and that therefore, the matter may be ordered to be listed on
the cause list and the paper may be called for. Accordingly, the
registry was directed to list the matter in today’s cause list. As
per the direction, the cause list has been prepared and displayed.
The petition is, accordingly, listed in today’s cause list at 2.30
p.m. and the papers of the petition has been placed before the
Court.

2. Mr.

Paul, learned advocate for the petitioner, has placed a photocopy of
the terms of the settlement dated 4.2.2011, which are finalized
between the parties i.e. the petitioner and the respondent workman.
He has submitted that though the appearance of learned advocate for
the respondent is not shown in the previous order dated 10.8.2010,
Mr. U.T.Mishra, learned advocate, has informed him that he would be
appearing on behalf of the respondent workman and he is aware about
the fact that the settlement between the parties has been arrived at.

3. Since
by virtue of the settlement, the respondent workman has agreed to
give-up his right and claim for reinstatement (as awarded by the
Labour Court by the impugned award), this Court has considered it
appropriate to call the respondent workman before the Court and
confirm the factual aspects from him. Mr. Paul has informed the Court
that he would intimate his client, i.e. the employer of the
respondent workman, who in turn will instruct the respondent workman
to remain present on 25.2.2011 so that the factual aspects of the
settlement can be confirmed.

Hence,
S.O. to 25.2.2011. To be listed in First Board.

[K.M.Thaker,
J.]

kdc

   

Top