Mr Amit Singhal Vs Lumen India Private Ltd. — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

Mr Amit Singhal Vs Lumen India Private Ltd. — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 10.10.2025 on IA Nos. 8 and 9 in I.D. No.82/2019 set aside; petitioner permitted to cross-examine the Management witness on the next date fixed by the Labour Court (29.04.2026) without taking any adjournment and concluding the cross-examination; no unnecessary adjournments to be sought thereafter to argue the matter on merit.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 10.10.2025 passed on IA Nos. 8 and 9 in I.D. No.82/2019 by the II Additional Labour Court, Bengaluru — rejecting the petitioner's application to recall and further cross-examine the only witness on behalf of the Management — should be set aside. +1 more

Court's answer

The petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 10.10.2025 on IA Nos. 8 and 9 in I.D. No.82/2019 is set aside.

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner's counsel's uncle had died on the day the case was posted for further cross-examination, the petitioner should be granted indulgence to cross-examine the Management witness, on the condition that on the next date of hearing before the Labour Court the petitioner shall not seek adjournment at any cost and shall conclude the cross-examination.

Key takeaways

It was made clear that after the cross-examination the petitioner should not seek unnecessary adjournments to argue the matter on merit.ratio¶¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India — Industrial dispute I.D. No.82/2019 (II Additional Labour Court, Bengaluru) — Order dated 10.10.2025 on IA Nos. 8 and 9 rejecting recall and further cross-examination of the sole Management witness set aside — Non-appearance of petitioner's counsel on the date fixed for further cross-examination owing to the death of his uncle accepted as a valid ground — Petitioner granted indulgence to cross-examine the Management witness on 29.04.2026 strictly without adjournment and directed to conclude the cross-examination — Clarified that no unnecessary adjournments shall be sought for arguing the matter on merits. (Anant Ramanath Hegde, J.)

NC: 2026:KHC:23891 WP No. 33196 of 2025

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

WRIT PETITION NO. 33196 OF 2025 (L-RES)

BETWEEN:

MR. AMIT SINGHAL S/O SHYAM SUNDAR SINGHAL AGE 41 YEARS R/AT NO.302, "SREE UTOPIA APARTMENT", 3RD FLOOR, 'A' BLOCK, KADUBEESANAHALLI, PANATHUR POST, MARTHAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 076.

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT PLOT NO.1005, BANGALI PADA, POWER HOUSE ROAD, NEAR AVH PAPER AND STATIONARY ROURKELA - 769 001, STATE-ODISHA …PETITIONER

Digitally signed by BELUR RANGADHAMA NANDINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. HALLUR SHIVAYOGI, ADVOCATE) AND:

LUMEN INDIA PRIVATE LTD., (FORMERLY CENTURY LINK TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.) (FORMERLY QWEST TELECOM SOFTWARE SERVICES PVT. LTD.) OFFICE AT SALARPURIA TOUCH STONE II AND IV FLOOR, SY NO.15/1A AMD 14P7, KADUBEESANAHALLI, VARTHUR HOBLI BENGALURU - 560 103 R/BY ITS SENIOR MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. SANTOSH BIJUR

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:23891 WP No. 33196 of 2025

HC-KAR

REGISTERED UNDER THE

COMPANIES ACT 2013 (OLD ACT 1956)

MR. GAURAN MADAN HR MANAGER, OFFICE AT LUMEN INDIA PVT. LTD., SALARPURIA, HALIMARK, BLOCK B, I AND II, 002 B WING, SURVEY NO.15/3 AND 16, KADUBEESANAHALI, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 103.

MRS. SHUBHANGI TYAGI SENIOR HR EXECUTIVE OFFICE AT SALARPURIA TOUCH STONE, II AND IV FLOOR, SY NO.15/1A AND 14P7, KADUBEESANAHALI, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 103.

MR. SIDDHARTHA SINGH SENIOR TECHNICAL MANAGER OFFICE AT LUMEN INDIA PVT. LTD., SALARPURIA, HALIMARK, BLOCK B, I AND II, 002 B WING, SURVEY NO.15/3 AND 16, KADUBEESANAHALI, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 103.

MISS. PARVEEN GURTATTA PROJECT LEAD OFFICE AT SALARPURIA TOUCH STONE, II AND IV FLOOR, SY NO.15/1A AND 14P7 KADUBEESANAHALI, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 103.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V.G, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SEVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 28.04.2026 R3, R4 AND R5 ARE SERVED)

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:23891 WP No. 33196 of 2025

HC-KAR

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1) TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10/10/2025 PASSED ON IA NO. 8 AND 9 IN I.D. NO. 82/2019 PENDING ON THE FILE OF 2ND ADDL. JUDGE, LABOUR COURT AT BENGALURU, MARKED AS ANNX-F TO THE WP AND ETC.,.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1.

The petitioner has filed the petition to set aside the impugned order dated 10.10.2025 on IA Nos. 8 and 9 in I.D. No.82/2019 on the file of II Additional Labour Court at Bengaluru. In terms of the said order, the petitioner's application to recall and to further cross-examine the only witness on behalf of the Management, is rejected. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as on the date of further cross-examination,

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:23891 WP No. 33196 of 2025

HC-KAR

petitioner's counsel's uncle died, as such, the counsel could not appear before the Court and the crossexamination could not take place. Thus, he would submit that a valid ground was there for seeking adjournment.

Learned counsel for the first respondent would submit that on earlier occasion, after the witness was fully cross-examined, the case was posted for final arguments. After completion of final arguments, when the case was posted for submitting the written submissions, an application was filed to recall the witness. The application was allowed on payment of cost. Thereafter, the witness was cross-examined in-part and the matter was adjourned and on the adjourned. On the petitioner's counsel did not turn up to cross-examine the witness and Labour Court is justified in rejecting the application in a dispute which is pending since 2019.

The Court has considered the contentions raised

at the Bar and perused the records.

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:23891 WP No. 33196 of 2025

HC-KAR

Since it is stated that the petitioner's counsel's

uncle had died on the day when the case was posted for further cross-examination, the Court is of the view that petitioner should be granted indulgence to cross-examine the Management witness on a condition that, on the next

date of hearing before the Labour Court, the petitioner shall not seek adjournment at any cost and should conclude the cross-examination.

It is also made clear that after the crossexamination, the petitioner should not seek unnecessary adjournments to argue the matter on merit. It is stated that the matter is listed tomorrow i.e., on 29.04.2026. Hence, the following:-

ORDER

i) The petition is allowed and the impugned order

dated 10.10.2025 on IA Nos. 8 and 9 in I.D.No.82/2019 is set aside.

6 -

NC: 2026:KHC:23891 WP No. 33196 of 2025

HC-KAR

iii) The petitioner shall cross-examine the witness on

behalf of the Management on the next date to be fixed by the Labour Court on 29.04.2026.

iv) It is made clear that the petitioner shall not take any adjournment on the said date and the conditions

imposed above shall be complied with.

Sd/(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

BSV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4