Full Order Text
Interim Order 12 · 16 Feb 2026 · CNR DLCT130066742024
Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS Pdf Text: (18) LCA 4224/24 KHUSHI RAM Vs. M/S INDIA YAMAHA MOTORS PVT LTD Date:16.02.2026 Present: Sh. Yogesh Singh, AR for workman through VC. Sh. Dileep Kumar Sharma, proxy counsel for workman along with workman. Sh. Yashwant Mudgal, AR for management. Today matter is listed for management evidence. However, MW-1 is not present. Instead of tendering evidence, the management has filed an application, for deciding issue w.r.t. territorial jurisdiction as preliminary issue, accompanied with some documents on behalf of management. Copy supplied. The issue of territorial jurisdiction has already been framed vide order dated 09.04.2025. Since then seven dates have already been elapsed. Workman has already tendered his evidence and cross-examined by AR for the management. Thereafter, workman’s evidence was closed on 01.09.2025. On 28.05.2025 the management filed evidence affidavit of Sh. Dheeraj Chauhan to depose on behalf of management qua issue of territorial jurisdiction and non-maintainability of the present LCA under Section 33C(2) of I.D. Act. Thereafter, six dates elapsed and no application was filed by the management. The workman evidence was closed on 01.09.2025 and since then for the last three dates the management is taking adjournments to lead ME. Instead of leading ME, today also the management seeks adjournment by filing the present application. The counsel for the management apprised about already framing of issue of (Contd….2) -- 1 of 2 -- - 2 - territorial jurisdiction on dated 09.04.2025, however, the counsel was adamant to continuously argue on the application. When the counsel was asked about the MW-1 he failed to give any satisfactory explanation and rather continued to argue on the present application. The counsel was again and again apprised about the already framed issue on territorial jurisdiction, however, he was deliberately not hearing the advise of the court. When the court again and again asked about MW-1 he suddenly in a rude manner submitted that ‘ uska relative expire ho gaya hai’. When the counsel for management asked why this reason was not disclosed at the first instance then he failed to give any satisfactory answer. Considering the facts and circumstances and the conduct of the AR for management, one last and final opportunity is granted to the management for leading ME on the issue of territorial jurisdiction and non-maintainability of the present LCA in terms of issues already framed on dated 09.04.2015, subject to a cost of Rs.5000/- out of which Rs.4000/- is to be deposited with the DLSA Fund, RADC Delhi and remaining cost of Rs.1000/- is to be paid to the workman. Receipt be placed on record on the next date of hearing. The application for deciding the issue of territorial jurisdiction stands disposed off in above terms. Put up for payment of cost and for ME on 15.04.2026. (Dr. Surender Mohit Singh) District Judge, POLC-08/RACC New Delhi/16.02.2026(S) -- 2 of 2 --
