Disposed

R.Gnanavel, v. The Government of India

Madras HC23 Sept 2016WP/24054/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Lok Adalat award settled a labor dispute arising from W.C.No.222 of 2010 between employee R.Gnanavel and employer Virudhagiri. The parties mutually agreed to a reduced sum of Rs.3,50,000/-, which was paid in cash, satisfying the original award and leading to the disposal of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The award is deemed fully satisfied by the payment of Rs.3,50,000/- in cash. The writ petition is disposed of. Court fees are refunded.

R.Gnanavel, Vs The Government of India — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, CHENNAI Lok Adalat-II organised by the High Court Legal Services Committee

¶2

Friday, the 23^rd day of September, 2016 LOK ADALAT AWARD (Chapter VI and u/s 21 of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987) Presided by

¶3

Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE T.N.VALLINAYAGAM, (Retd.) and

¶4

Members:

¶5

(Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.3.2016 and direct to proceed the Revenue Recovery Proceedings against the fifth respondent and to take suitable action.) R.Gnanavel ..Petitioner /vs/ 1.The Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Sharam Shakthi Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi 110 001. 2.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary, Labour and Employment Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009. 3.The District Collector, Collectorate Office, Cuddalore. 4.The Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II DMS Complex, Teynampet, Chennai 600 006. 5.Virudhagiri S/o Bhoologa Pillai, Tacel Ceramic Factory Campus, Kattukudaloor Road, Anna Nagar, Virudhachalam. ..Respondents

¶6

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶7

This case came up for settlement before Lok Adalat. All the parties are present. Ms.M.Malar, Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Natarajan, learned counsel for the fifth respondent are present. After mutual discussion, negotiation, mediation and conciliation between all the parties, they arrived at a compromise to settle the matter as follows:

¶8

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

¶9

The Writ Petition arises out of W.C.No.222 of 2010.

¶10

Now, the employer Virudhagiri has settled the matter with the employee R.Gnanavel. Originally, an award was passed for Rs.4,89,240/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 30.08.2008. Now, the matter has been settled between the petitioner R.Gnanavel and the 5^th respondent Virudhagiri for a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakhs and fifty thousand only) in full quit and the award is passed for a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- directing the fifth respondent Virudhagiri to pay the said amount to the petitioner and the award is fully satisfied by making payment in cash of Rs.3,50,000/-. The cash is handed over to the petitioner R.Gnanavel in the presence of Ms.Malar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.Natarajan, learned counsel for the 5^th respondent. The extract copy of the minutes of the proceedings of the fifth respondent/company is filed and recorded. The authorised person for the 5^th respondent viz., Mr.K.Kolanjiyappan is present and signed.

¶11

Thus, the award passed stands fully satisfied. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. sd/sd/R.Gnanavel Counsel for the Petitioner sd/sd/Mr.Virudhagiri Counsel for the 5^th Respondent authorised by Mr.K.Kolanjiyappan

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

The Court fee paid shall be refunded to the parties in the manner provided under the Court Fees Act, 1870 as provided for under sub Sec.1 of Section 21 r/w 25 of LSA Act 1987 as amended in 1994.

¶14

sd/sd/Judge sd/Member Member Sd/Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. To The parties/Advocate concerned Copy to: 1.The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, Chennai. 2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras. 3.The Section Officer, Lok Adalat Section, High Court, Madras.+2copies 4 The Govt of India Ministry of Labour and Employment Sharam Shakthi Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi 110 001 5 The Govt. of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Secretary Labour and Employment Dept. Fort. St. George, Chennai 6 The District Collector Collectorate Officer, Cuddalore 7 The District Commission of Labour II DMS Complex, Teynampet, Chennai 600 006

¶15

W.P.No. 24054 of 2016

¶16

MD : 19/10/2016

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Gnanavel, v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Gnanavel, v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Icici Lombard General Ins.Com Vs K.Jegannadha Reddy

New India Assurance Co.Ltd Vs K.Shanmugham

M.Murugan Vs Paul Thangammal (Died)

Velusamy Gounder Vs a.Sellammal

Venugopal Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

T.I.Cycles of India Vs the Presiding Officer