Back
2001 Supreme(Cal) 570
High Court Of Calcutta
BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA
STANDARD CHARTERED GRINDLAYS BANK LTD. - Appellant
Versus
GRINDLAYS BANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION - Respondent
G. A. 3306 Of 2001
Decided On : 09/04/2001
D.MUKHERJI, H.K.Mitra, INDIRA BANERJI, P.S.SENGUPTA, R.N.JHUNJHUNVALA, S.PAL CHAUDHARY, S.ROY CHAUDHARY, S.SEN
Acts punishable lose protection under the trade unions act. Demonstrations affecting normal business and confidence of depositors justify the granting of an injunction.
Headnote:
Trade Unions Act - Illegal Activities - The court found that once an act becomes punishable, it loses its protection under the trade unions act. The plaintiff proved a strong prima facie case of illegal activities by the defendants, leading to the granting of an injunction.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff alleged that the defendants obstructed the entrance to the offices, forced personnel and visitors to leave, and threatened employees, leading to a halt in business transactions. The plaintiff sought an injunction and obtained an order under section 144 of the code of criminal procedure.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the defendants' protest affected the normal transaction of the bank and undermined the confidence of the depositors. It concluded that the plaintiff proved a strong prima facie case of illegal activities, leading to the granting of an injunction.
Issues: The main issue was whether the plaintiff was able to prove prima facie the allegations made in the application for injunction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of the banking regulation act prohibit not only violent demonstrations but also non-violent ones if they prevent the normal business of the bank. It emphasized that such activities invariably shake the confidence of the depositors, justifying the granting of an injunction.
Final Decision: The plaintiff was entitled to an order of injunction till the disposal of the suit, and the interim order granted earlier was made absolute. The defendants' application for dismissal of the application for injunction was also dismissed, with no costs awarded.
( 1 ) THE application for temporary injunction and the application filed by the defendants or rejection of such application were taken up together for hearing.
( 2 ) THE plaintiff, a banking company within the meaning of the banking regulation act, 1949 has filed the present suit thereby claiming the following reliefs:" (A) a decree for rs. 50 crores (sic) against the defendant nos. 1 to 23. (B) a declaration that the defendant nos. 1 to 23 have no right to resort to activities resulting in the interference with the business of the plaintiff-bank or to cause damage to its properties and documents, (C) permanent injunction restraining the defendant nos. 1 to 23 and each of them by themselves or by their servants, associates, aides, agents, assigns, nominees, supporters and members from: (I) committing any tortuous (sic) acts interfering and/or obstructing the normal functioning at the main office of the plaintiff-bank in any of its branches and/or offices in any manner whatsoever; (II) threatening or intimidating, abusing, insulting, gheraoing and/or wrongfully confining any officer or member of the supervisory staff or any other employees and/or customers of the plaintiff; (III) holding any meeting or demonstration or organising unlawful assemblies in or around the main office or any of the offices and/or branch premises of the plaintiff or within 100 yards thereof without previous permission of the plaintiff in writing; (IV) shouting slogans within a distance of 100 yards from the main office or any of the branches of the plaintiff in calcutta; (V) displaying and/or pasting and/or painting any posters or slogans within or outside the main office or in any of the offices of the branches of the plaintiff or otherwise damaging, destroying, defacing, mutilating, disfiguring or spoiling the property of the plaintiff in any manner whatsoever; (VI) intimidating any customer or constituent or any willing employees of the plaintiff in any manner whatsoever; (VII) obstructing ingress to or egress from the main office or any of the offices or branch premises of the plaintiff in calcutta; (D) appropriate orders be passed and/or directions be given on the defendants nos. 24 to 32 and each of them to render necessary police assistance for the purpose of implementation of and/or giving effect to the orders passed and / or to be passed in these proceedings. (E) alternatively an enquiry into damages and a decree for the amount found due on such enquiry. (F) attachment. (G) receiver, (H) costs. (I) further or other reliefs. "
( 3 ) IMMEDIATELY after filing of the aforesaid suit the plaintiff came up with the present application for injunction against the defendants in the following terms:" (A) an injunction do issue restraining the respondents nos. 1 to 23 and/or their servants, assigns, agents, or supporters and/or each of the from: (I) threatening or intimidating, abusing, insulting, assaulting, gheraoing and/or wrongfully confining and/or hurling abuses on any officer or member of the supervisory staff or any other employees of your petitioner-bank;ii) holding any meeting or demonstration in and around the branch premises of your petitioner's or any other offices and/or branches of your petitioner in and around calcutta or within 100 yards thereof without previous permission of your petitioner in writing; (III) shouting slogans within a distance of 100 yards from the main office or any of the branches of your petitioner in calcutta; (IV) committing any tortuous (sic) acts interfering with normal work at the main any office or any other branches and/or offices in calcutta of your petitioner in any manner whatsoever;v) displaying and/or pasting and/or painting any posters and / or slogans in and around the main office or in any of the branches of your petitioner in calcutta and/or otherwise defacing, damaging, destroying, mutilating, disfiguring or spoiling and or causing damage to the property, documents, records,
