IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No. 617 of 2023 Decided on: 08.11.2023 Tilak Raj ……..Petitioner Versus The Chalet Co-operative Agriculture Services Society Ltd and another …….Respondents Coram HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN SHARMA, JUDGE WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING? Yes.

For the petitioner : Mr. N.K.Thakur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Divya Raj Singh, Advocate.

For the respondents : Nemo.

Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral)

The petitioner, being the plaintiff in Civil Suit H No. 273/2008 (Annexure P-1) has come up before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the orders dated 28.07.2023 (Annexure P-11), {referred to as the Impugned order} passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1, Amb, District Una, whereby the Court below had framed the Issues while dealing with the Execution No. 4/X/18 titled as Tilak Raj versus The Chalet Cooperative Agriculture Service Society Ltd.

and another; so as to adjudicate-determine the clai.m-

questions arising from the decree, which were relating to the execution, discharge and satisfaction of the decree.

2. FACTUAL MATRIX:

2(i). The case of the petitionfer-plaintiff before the Trial Court in the Civil Suit No. 273/2008 (Annexure P-1) was that the petitioner was appointed as a Salesman in the Defendant-1 Chalet Cooperative Agriculture Service Society on regular basis, in the month of January, 2005 but his services were terminated by the respondent- defendant No.1 on 25.01.2008 in violation of the principles of natural justice and without notice etc., illegally; and the order dated 05.02.2008, suspending the petitioner-plaintiff was also illegal.

iIn this background, the suit for declaration was filed for declaring the resolution of termination dated 25.01.2008 and suspension order 05.02.2008 as null and void and sought the relief for reinstatement with all benefits, with the prayer that respondent-defendant No. 1 be restrained from appointing any other Salesman in the Society in place of the plaintiff.

2(ii). Notably, the respondent-defendant No.1 filed a written statement and had disputed the status .of the petitioner-plaintiff that he was not a regular salesman in the Society besides other averments, which are not relevant for the purposes of adjudicating the present petition. f

2(iii) The Civil Suit No. 273 of 2008, was decided by the Trial Court i.e. Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Court No.1, Amb, District Una on 31.01.2017 (Annexure P-1)

and the operative part of the judgement reads as under:-

“22. Keeping in view my discussion and findings upon all issues above, present suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed. The resolution dated 25.01.2008 and letter dated 05.02.2008 suspending and terminating the service of plaintiff as salesman are declared wrong, illegal, null and void. The defendants i are directed to reinstate the services of the plaintiff as salesman of the society with all the due benefits. The defendants restrained from appointing any other salesman in the society in place of plaintiff. No order as to costs. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly.”

3. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-(II), UNA, DISTRICT UNA (H.P):

3(i). The judgement passed by the Trial Court on

31.01.2017 (Annexure P-1), was assailed by respPondent-

defendant No.1 in Civil Appeal No. 25 of 2017 before the First Appellate Court i.e. Additional District Judge, Una, H.P. and the same was decid ed on 23.09.2017 (Annexure P-2) whereby, the findings recorded by the Trial Court were upheld and the operative part of the judgement reads as under:-

“44. uIn view of my findings on the above point, the appeal partly allowed as follows:-

Judgement and decree dated 31.01.2017 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Court No.1, Amb, District Una, H.P. in Civil Suit No. 272 of 2008 titled as h Tilak Raj vs. The Chalet Co-operative Agriculture Services Society Ltd. and others declaring resolution dated 25.01.2008 and letter dated 5.2.2008 H as illegal, wrong and void and the direction to the defendants t