Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 272 (GUJ)

Manager - Naaz Cinema v. Iqbalunisa Latifmiyan Saiyed Wd/O Latifmiyan Ahmedmiyan

2011-03-31

J.B.PARDIWALA, SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA

body2011
JUDGMENT HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA, J. 1. THE present appeal is preferred by the appellant original petitioner challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 8th March 2010 in Special Civil Application No.7821 of 2008. THE learned Single Judge dismissed the petition adopting the same line of reasoning as raised in Special Civil Application No.7819 of 2008 and accordingly passed the following order:- 2. PETITIONER Manager, Naaz Cinema, has challenged award/order passed by Labour Court, Nadiad in Recovery Application No. 81 of 2006 dated 4th December, 2007. Learned advocate Mr. Shah appearing for respondent workman submitted that against same petitioner, in an identical matter, same question has been examined by this Court and petition filed by petitioner Manager, Naaz Cinema has been dismissed in case of The Manager, Naaz Cinema v. Vasantben Rameshbhai Ghumadiya Widow of Rameshbhai Raijibhai, reported in 2008(3) G.L.R. P.2431. Learned Advocate Mr. Japee also agreed to submission made by learned advocate Mr. Shah. Therefore, considering decision of this Court as referred to above wherein same petitioner has challenged identical order of Recovery Application filed by workman where petition is dismissed by this Court. Therefore, reasonings, which have been given by this Court in aforesaid reported decision are squarely applicable and applied to facts of this case. Therefore, considering reported decision as referred to above, there is no substance in Special Civil Application; accordingly, Special Civil Application is dismissed. Reasonings given by this Court in 2008(3) G.L.R. P. 2431 are squarely applicable to facts of this case, therefore, no separate reason is given by this Court while dismissing Special Civil Application. Accordingly, Special Civil Application is dismissed. 3. THE judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.7819 of 2008 was a subject matter of challenge in Letters Patent Appeal No.1198 of 2009. We have dismissed Letters Patent Appeal No.1198 of 2009 confirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.7819 of 2008. 3. THE judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.7819 of 2008 was a subject matter of challenge in Letters Patent Appeal No.1198 of 2009. We have dismissed Letters Patent Appeal No.1198 of 2009 confirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.7819 of 2008. We adopt the same line of reasoning as adopted in Letters Patent Appeal No.1198 of 2009 and dismiss the present appeal with costs of Rs.10,000/- imposed upon the appellant original petitioner to be paid to the widow of the deceased workman i.e. respondent herein either by cash or by cheque and produce the receipt of the same with the Registry of this Court within a period of 15 days from today.