Legal Question in Employment Law in India

case facts:

1. I Master of a ship, Plaintiff has filed a original side Suit 527 0f 2005 in Bombay high Court against his employer shipping co. for victimizing me, and for declaring an alleged termination letter dated 20.9.2004 as illegal bad in law, payment of my salary and arrears as per my service agreement and making my EPF fund operative which is made dormant by the defendant.

2. The defendant from time to time has made contradictory submissions on oath before the high court �sometimes saying YES and sometimes NO� to my termination. The Plaintiff filed a CP No. 7 0f 2012, the court took cognizance of the contempt as interference in course of justice referring it to the division bench. However the division bench hearing contempt petition did not send contempt notice, informing the Plaintiff verbally that the Defendant being a corporation and sending notice is prerogative of the court and CP is disposed off, but the Suit hearing is not yet started.

3. From documentary evidence available, the Plaintiff can prove either of the issue mentioned below.

(i) The Plaintiff continuous in service of the Defendant arbitrarily not paid salary, provident funds made dormant and victimized.

(ii) The plaintiff�s services are illegally terminated, not paid salary provident funds made dormant and victimized.

Query:

the counsel appearing for Defendants in my suit is pressing the court to frame one of the fallowing issue, what does this issue means?

"Whether the defendants prove that the reliefs claimed in the

suit are in the nature of specific performance of contract of

personal employment ? If so, whether the suit lodged is maintainable"

Experts are requested to inform, if this issue is applicable in my matter and how suit will not be maintainable .Sir, Please help me I do not understand the meaning of this issue at all. I am Plaintiff in person. 91-9821291594


Asked on 8/12/13, 8:44 am

1 Answer from Attorneys
Fca Prashant Chavan Expert Edge LLP

12.08.2013

Dear Sir,

The Judge at the Mumbai High Court has erred in disposing off your case without a proper hearing being conducted. It is binding and compulsory for the Court to issue contempt notice to the litigants, and it is not an arbitrary or discretionary prerogative of the Court. The Court cannot take guise on the stance that the Defendant is a Corporation, because in litigation proceedings, both, the plaintiff and the respondents have always to be treated at par. What the attorney / counsel of the defendant is trying to do with his plea to the Court, is trying to ensure that your claims are never ever again entertained by the Court. Since you are in a position to prove your claims by establishing all the facts, you should go in appeal against the verdict Order of the Judge. You may get in touch with us to pursue your matter and guide you further.

Regards,

Read more
Answered on 8/12/13, 10:13 am


Related Questions & Answers

More Labor and Employment Law questions and answers in India