1

A.No.3452 of 2022

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.,

This application has been filed to grant leave to sue against the

respondents/defendants 1 to 31.

2. The suit is filed for permanent injunction against the

respondents/defendants. The applicant/plaintiff is a company, engaged in

the manufacture of agricultural tractors, farm equipments, auto mobile and

commercial batteries, etc., The rspondents/defendants were engaged as

supervisors of the applicant/company in different categories and due to

downsizing of the company, the applicant/company made a proposal to

the respondents/defendants to offer resignation in lieu of payment of six

months salary in lumpsum and out of 31 respondents/defendants, 15 have

accepted and encashed their full and final settlement and others have

resigned/accepted termination from the services of the applicant/company.

3. While so, according to the learned counsel for the

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2

applicant/company, all of sudden on 03.08.2022 at about 10.00 a.m., the

respondents/defendants along with their spouses had formed huge crowd

and gathered at applicant/company's manufacturing unit at Maramalai

Nagar and started raising slogans and threatened the employees working

there and also made attempts to cause damage the property of the

applicant/company. The respondents/defendants have also announced

their intention to raise slogans at the schedule establishments which are

located at landmark locations in the city and they also threatened to stick

posters and distribute pamphlets slandering the applicant/plaintiff and its

senior management.

4. According to the learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff, the

Corporate Office of the applicant/company is hugely significant

establishment with huge number of employees and if any disruption is

caused, the same could result in enormous loss and prejudice to not only

the applicant/company but also its stakeholders and employees and would

also result in huge loss and damage to the applicant/company. The

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3

consequences of such events will take effect at the applicant/plaintiffs'

Corporate Office, which is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of

this Court. He would also submit that since the manufacturing unit of the

applicant/plaintiff is located at Maraimalai Nagar which is outside the

jurisdiction of this Court and also since several of the

respondents/defendants are residing outside the jurisdiction of this Court,

he seeks leave of this Court under Clause XII of the Letters Patent to sue

the respondents/defendants.

5. Considering the averments of the plaint and the submissions

made by the learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff that since the major

cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Court as the

applicant/company is situated well within the jurisdiction of this Court,

but the manufacturing unit of the applicant/company is situated at

Maraimalai Nagar which is outside the jurisdiction of this Court and also

since several of the respondents/defendants are residing outside the

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4

dn

jurisdiction of this Court, this Court is of the view that it would be

appropriate to grant the leave to sue against all the

respondents/defendants.

6. Accordingly, this application is allowed.

dn

18.08.2022

A.No.3452 of 2022

4/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis