SANDEEP AGGARWAL Vs. MOHIT SINGH AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition the Petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.08.2010 whereby application filed by the Respondent -workman under Order 6 Rule 17 was allowed.

(2.) The Respondent -workman filed a petition under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act on 25.11.2009 and alongwith the application Petitioner also filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. At that time only two Respondents were arrayed in the petition, namely, M/s Ayushi Steel Industry Tokki and Shri Sandeep Aggarwal, its Managing Director. The workman thereafter filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 in which he stated that he had come to know after obtaining information under the Right to Information Act that M/s Ayushi Steel Industry Tokki is the proprietorship concerned of Smt. Anju Aggarwal wife of Tarsem Aggarwal. This application was allowed by the impugned order.

(3.) THE main challenge to the order is that no opportunity was given to the Petitioner to file reply to this application. Normally, such an opportunity should be given but I find from the order sheet that even the counsel representing the present Petitioner had not made any request for giving time to file reply. I also find that no prejudice is being caused to the Petitioner. In case, Anju Aggarwal is not the owner of the firm, she can in her reply to the claim petition state that she is not the owner. How, the Petitioner Sandeep Aggarwal is adversely affected by the order is not clear.