Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
V/s.
at _________________________________________________ do hereby on
1) I deny that the services of the Second Party were terminated either on
23.07.2009 as alleged or at all, much less illegally. I say that the Second
Party has himself not been attending to his duties since the said date
and that since the services of the Second Party have never been
and with malafide intentions not reported for duty. I say that the Second
Party has never completed 240 days in any year of his employment with
2) I deny that the Second party had any ailment of pain in the knee joint
since the year 2008. I deny that the Second party had submitted any
fitness certificate or that he was not allowed to join duty. I say that the
3) I say that the Union has not written any alleged dated 23.07.2009. I say
that the letter dated 18.08.2009 and the alleged demand letter dated
31.08.2009 are replete with falsehood and fabrication and I deny the
fabricated. I deny that the second party was sick and puts the second
6) I say that the contents of the above paras are true and correct and are
from my personal knowledge and records of the First Party and I believe
DEPONENT
IDENTIFIED BY ME
V/s
referred to and relied upon by their Advocate in the course of his arguments
Free India (P.) Ltd. And The Regional Director, Employees’ State
MUMBAI
DATED: 02.07.2010
V/s
AFFIDAVIT OF MR.
LIEU OF EXAMINATION-
IN-CHIEF.
under:
the contents of the said Application are true and correct. I say that
examination-in-chief.
the cause title and currently, the Applicant is defunct and not
time.
5
5) I say that the said Notice called upon the Applicant for a personal
hearing. I say that during the period in dispute, the Applicant was
losses and it was declared a sick unit by the Bankers, viz. UCO
Bank vide their Certificate dated 02.05.1988. I say that the said
who was looking after the affairs of the Applicant was seriously ill
and was advised medical bed-rest. I say that the said letter was
7) I say that the Opponent did not reply to the said letter dated
04.07.1991 and after a long gap vide its letter dated 16.08.1993
informed the Applicant that a date for personal hearing was fixed
to 01.02.1992. I say that the Applicant has thus cleared all its
paid the contribution for the relevant period on actual basis and
also showed the necessary documents. I say that the said Officer
closed.
9) I say that the Applicant received from the Opponent a letter dated
were at all given in the said letter as to why after more than 5 years
the issue was being reopened. I say that the Applicant addressed a
that the Applicant had already paid the contribution for the
relevant period, i.e., from March 1989 to September 1990 and that
10) I say that it was also informed to the Opponent vide the said letter
therefore, after such a long period, it was not possible for the
that all the employees had already left the employment of the
7
to help the Applicant to trace records after such a long period. I say
that two of the partners of the Applicant viz. Mr. Bharat H. Dani
time to see if it could trace out any documents. I say that no such
time was granted and the matter was fixed on 03.03.1999. I say
paid.
31.03.1999. I say that the said Order did not mention any reasons
as to on what basis the said Order was passed. I say that the Order
did not disclose as to how the Officer concerned concluded that all
259 employees were covered for levying contribution. I say that the
very fact that the officer concerned has assumed wages of all the
employees at Rs. 880/- per month itself shows that the said Order
is arbitrary. I say that there were at the relevant time more than
limit under the Act of Rs. 1600/- during the relevant period and
therefore, outside the pale of coverage under the Act. I say that the
to how the contribution amount of Rs. 3,13, 960/- was worked out.
8
arbitrary.
12) I say that the Applicant has filed the receipts issued by the
paid by the Applicant to the Opponent for the relevant period, i.e.,
are true and correct. I pray that the same may be exhibited.
13) I further say that the Applicant has filed at page no. 3 to the
Dani. I identify his signature. I say that the contents therein are
true and correct. I pray that the same may be exhibited. I say that
Dani. I identify his signature. I say that the contents therein are
true and correct. I pray that the same may be exhibited. I say that
the Opponent has totally ignored the factual aspect that the
14) I say that the Applicant has been defunct from 01.10.1990 and
that pursuant to the closure of the Applicant, the services of all the
employees were terminated and their legal dues were paid. I say
9
that the workmen employed then with the Applicant were the
at the relevant time the said union had filed several cases before
workmen of the Applicant in the years 1991 and 1992. I say that
1993 with the Applicant which was duly signed by the President of
the said union on behalf of the workmen and thereafter all the
cases filed by the said union were withdrawn from the respective
copy of the said settlement dated 8 th November, 1993 and mark the
15) I say that the claim of the Opponent is arbitrary and untenable and
16) I therefore pray that the present Application may be allowed and
the prayers made by the Applicant in the Application in para 12, (i)-
17) I say that the contents of the above paragraphs are true and correct
and the same are from my personal knowledge and from the
DEPONENT
IDENTIFIED BY ME
ADVOCATE
10
BEFORE ME