IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK

C.M.P. NO. 1132 OF 2016

From the judgment dated 27.06.2016 passed by the learned 1^st

Addl. District Judge, Sambalpur in F.A.O. No. 10/5 of 2016.

………

Aswini Kumar Guru & another

::::

Petitioners.

VERSUS

Orissa Collieries Mazdoor Sangha & another

:::: Opp. parties.

For the Petitioners

::::

M/s. G. B. Jena, D.P.

Nanda, R.K. Kanungo,

B.P. Panda, S.B. Sahoo,

S.R. Rath, P. Raj, advs.

For the Opp. Parties

::::

Mr. B. Sahoo &

B. Mohanty,(for O.P.No. 1)

advocates.

………

PRESENT :

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.DASH

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date of hearing :: 06.10.2016 : Date of judgment : 21.11.2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The petitioner by filing an application under section 227

of the Constitution has sought for quashment of an order passed

by the learned 1^st Addl. District Judge, Sambalpur in F.A.O. No.

10/5 of 2016 in an appeal under order 43 rule (1)(r) of the Code

of Civil Procedure (hereinafter for short is called as the Code). The

appeal had been filed calling in question the order passed by the

learned Sr. Civil Judge, Sambalpur in I.A. No. 47 of 2015

// 2 //

arising out of C.S. No. 478 of 2015 in the matter of an application

under order 39 rule 1 and 2 of the Code.

It may be stated here that the present petitioners before

this Court are the defendants in the original suit, now pending

in the court of learned Sr. Civil Judge, Sambalpur and the

respondent is the plaintiff therein.

2.

The respondent had filed the suit praying the reliefs as

under:-

“(a)

declaring that the defendant no. 1 (one) is not the

President and the defendant no. 2 (two) is not the

General Secretary of the Plaintiff’s Trade Union;

(b)

declaring that no meeting of assembly of

delegates was called for to hold election on

11.09.2015 (Eleventh September two thousand

fifteen) by the General Secretary of the plaintiff’s

Union or any authorized person of the plaintiff-

Trade Union;

(c)

directing the defendant no. 1 and 2 (one and two)

to pay compensation / damages of Rs. 1,00,000/-

(one lakh) to the plaintiff jointly and severally;

(d)

Permanent injunction against the defendant no. 1

(one) restraining him to claim or represent

himself as the President of the plaintiff-Trade

Union;

(e)

permanent injunction against the defendant no. 2

(two) restraining him to claim or represent

// 3 //

himself as the General Secretary of the plaintiff-

Trade Union;

(f)

all the cost of this suit; and

(g)

any other fit proper and equitable relief.

Simultaneously, it had filed a petition under order 39

rule 1 and 2 of the Code for issuance of temporary injunction

restraining the defendants from representing themselves as the

President & Secretary respectively of the petitioner’s trade union

before the Mahanadi Coal Field Limited (MCL) and United

Commercial Bank (UCO Bank) in representing the trade union

to do any other act in that direction and capacity.

3.

The trial court referring to the rival case of the parties

as set out in the pleadings found the followings which are

relevant for the purpose.

(i)

Shri S.C. Pradhan, the person representing the

plaintiff’s –trade Union in the suit as the right to

call the meeting of the delegates and election

meeting.

(ii)

The President INTUC vide letter dated 29.09.2015

has

requested

the

Chairman-cum-Managing

Director, MCL, Sambalpur to recognize and

support the new set of office bearers headed by

Mr. Aswini Kumar Guru, the President and

Hemanta Kumar Pradhan, the General Secretary

in such a situation, it would be prudent to hold

that if the injunction is granted, it will not cause

// 4 //

inconvenience to the defendants. Likewise if

injunction is not granted, the defendants will

represent

themselves

such

as

before

all

concerned and