M/S. BELLA VISTA DRYCLEANERS vs VISHWANATH KANOJIA, AKHIL BHARTIYA GENERAL KAMGAR UNION AND ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

CRA.94.2024.doc Ajay IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 94 OF 2024 M/s. Bella Vista Drycleaners .. Applicant Versus Vishwanath Kanojia, Akhil Bhartiya General Kamgar Union and Anr. .. Respondents ....................  Mr. Sunil Rajaram More, Advocate for Applicant.  None appears for Respondents.  Mr. Shailesh S. Pathak, Appointed Advocate through the Legal Aid Department to assist the Court. ......…........… CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. RESERVED ON : OCTOBER 06, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON : DECEMBER 02, 2025. JUDGEMENT: 1. Heard Mr. More learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Pathak learned appointed Advocate to assist the Court. None appears for Respondents despite being served. 2. On 15.09.2025, after hearing Mr. More, learned Advocate for Applicant the following order was passed:- “1. Heard, Mr. More learned Advocate for Applicant - Employer. 2. Reference (IDA) No. 158-D of 2021 is heard by 7th Labour Court, Bandra, Mumbai. A preliminary issue as to whether the Applicant employer can be allowed to be represented by Advocate in the Reference is the question which is decided in the negative, agitated before me. Applicant is a small time laundry employing 4-5 persons. In Reference (IDA), Revision Applicant being the First Party – employer filed Application below Exh. C-5 seeking a direction and permission from Labour Court to engage / appoint Advocate to represent its case in the 1 of 17 CRA.94.2024.doc present matter and conduct cross-examination. That Application is comprehensively rejected by virtue of the impugned order appended at page Nos. 38-49 of the Revision Application. 3. Mr. More would draw my attention to the impugned order and submit that in view of the extant decisions, passed by the Delhi High