Mahesh Singh v. Raman International
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court disposed of multiple writ petitions filed against the Industrial Tribunal. It noted that the Respondent refused service of notice of service of process, held the impugned awards prima facie perverse, and set them aside remanding matters to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication
What did the court decide?
The impugned awards of the Tribunal set aside; specific references remanded to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Signature Not Verified Signed By:RAM DATT Signing Date:09.09.2024 16:54 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file an d no page is missing.
L(
..... Respondent
RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. With 44 4- W.P. (C) 2659/2011 MAYADEVI ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates versus RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. With 145 + W.P. (C) 2660/2011 VINOD KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates versus RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. With :46 1+ W.P. (C) 2661/2011 MOHD. RAFIQ . . .... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates Versus page no 216 : W.P. (C) 2656/2011
RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None With 47 + W.P. (C) 2662/2011 ALKA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates versus RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. And 48 + W.P. (C) 2663/2011 DINESH CHANDER SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates versus RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER o/o 17.08.2011 1. An affidavit of dasti notice has been filed by Mr. Babu Ram, clerk of learned counsel for the Petitioner. He states therein that he along with W.P. (C) 265612011 pagenoJ/6
a
process server of this Court reached the last knmvn address of Respondent M/s. Raman International at E-2/77-78, Sita Puri, Janakpuri, Delhi on 25th July 2011. Initially one Mr. Satyan who was present there confirmed that the Respondent company was operating from the said premises but later on instructions from someone over telephone refused to accept dasti notice on 25th July 2011. He infonned that the office was of one Dynamic Firm and not ofM/s. Raman International. The process server visited the other address of Respondent company, i.e., T-1/88, Mangolpuri Industrial Area, Phase-!, Delhi - 110 083 on 1st August 2011. The guard at the premises informed the process server that it was the office of M/s. So han Global.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Respondent refused to accept service of writ process at the address indicated.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Mayadevi
- petitioner
Vinod Kumar
- petitioner
Mohd. Rafiq
- petitioner
Alka
- petitioner
Dinesh Chander Sharma
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court