Madras High Court
M/S.Sun-X Concrete India Pvt. Ltd vs Centre For Indian Trade Union on 6 October, 2021
Judgment dated 06.10.2021
in C.S.No.300 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 06.10.2021
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN
C.S.No.300 of 2021
and
O.A.Nos.619 and 621 of 2021
M/s.Sun-X Concrete India Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory
Mr.M.Magesh
Survey No.1/1, Koyambedu Village,
Block 64, SAF Games Village Scheme,
Koyambedu, Chennai-600 107. .. Plaintiff
Vs.
1. Centre for Indian Trade Union,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Nallasivayam Ninaivagam,
No.13, Mosque Street,
Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
2. Chennai Perunagar Motor Vagana Thozhilalar Sangam,
Rep. by its Secretary,
No.52, Cooks Salai, Ottery,
Chennai-600 012.
3. Mr.Raja, S/o Mr.Chinraj
4. Mr.Ramanathan Govindharajan, S/o Mr.Govindharaj
Page No.1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 06.10.2021
in C.S.No.300 of 2021
5. Mr.Jayaraman
6. Mr.V.Kuppusamy .. Defendants
Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules of this
Court, read with Order VII of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) and the suit
numbered as C.S.No.300 of 2021, praying for the judgment and decree
against the defendants as under:
(a) For a declaration declaring that the strike called for and conducted
on 25.08.2021 by the defendants without giving any notice to the plaintiff
and damaging the properties of the plaintiff besides obstructing the co-
workers from performing their duties, is illegal and bad in law.
(b) For damages of Rs.1,02,00,000/- (Rupees one crore and two lakhs
only) towards loss sustained by the plaintiff on account of the illegal strike
conducted by the defendants within the premises of the plaintiff on
25.08.2021 without giving any notice to the plaintiff and damaging the
properties of the plaintiff and obstructing the work being carried on by the
plaintiff.
(c) For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men,
agents, servants, or any person claiming through them or under them
including the members of the 1st and 2nd defendants from obstructing and
preventing the ingress and egress of men, materials and free movement of
vehicles from and to the plants of the plaintiff, and
(d) for the costs.
Page No.2/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 06.10.2021
in C.S.No.300 of 2021
For plaintiff : Mrs.Revathi Manivannan
JUDGMENT
The suit has been filed for the following prayers:
(a) For a declaration declaring that the strike called for and conducted
on 25.08.2021 by the defendants without giving any notice to the plaintiff
and damaging the properties of the plaintiff besides obstructing the co-
workers from performing their duties, is illegal and bad in law.
(b) For damages of Rs.1,02,00,000/- (Rupees one crore and two lakhs
only) towards loss sustained by the plaintiff on account of the illegal strike
conducted by the defendants within the premises of the plaintiff on
25.08.2021 without giving any notice to the plaintiff and damaging the
properties of the plaintiff and obstructing the work being carried on by the
plaintiff.
(c) For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men,
agents, servants, or any person claiming through them or under them
including the members of the 1st and 2nd defendants from obstructing and
preventing the ingress and egress of men, materials and free movement of
vehicles from and to the plants of the plaintiff, and
(d) for the costs.
Page No.3/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 06.10.2021
in C.S.No.300 of 2021
2. The case of the plaintiff-Company is that they are involved in
manufacture and supply of ready mix concrete. They have entered into a
service agreement, dated 01.06.2020 with one M/s.A.R.Constructions, a
registered Partnership Firm, which had agreed to transport ready mix
concrete through the drivers engaged by the said firm from one place to
another as instructed by the plaintiff through lorries owned by the plaintiff
on terms and conditions contained therein.
3. In terms of the said agreement, the registered partnership firm with
whom the agreement was entered into by the plaintiff, had supplied work
force/drivers and under the terms of the contract, the partnership firm was
required to ensure that its drivers attend work without fail.
4. According to the plaintiff, due to insubordination and lack of
devotion to duty, the defendants 3 and 4 who are working as lorry drivers,
were terminated on 24.08.2021 by the said contracting firm (partnership
firm). At this, on 25.08.2021, the defendants 3 to 6 have instigated all the
Page No.4/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 06.10.2021
in C.S.No.300 of 2021
drivers employed by the contracting firm to stage an illegal strike inside the
premises of the plaintiff-Company and brought the entire business
operations to a stand-still. Despite the plaintiff's efforts to negotiate for
settlement of any dispute, the same has been escalated, resulting in complete
dislocation of the operation of the plaintiff's business.
5. In the above circumstances, the suit has been filed claiming
damages to the tune of Rs.1,02,00,000/- towards the loss suffered by the
plaintiff-Company on account of the unscrupulous and unethical acts of the
defendants.
6. In support of the plaintiff's plaint, the following documents were
filed under Order 7 Rule 14(1) CPC:
Sl. Date Description Nature of
No. document
Copy of complaint filed with the Inspector of
1 25.08.2021 Police, Koyambedu Police Station along with Original
postal receipt
Copy of complaint filed with the Inspector of
2 25.08.2021 Police, Puzhal Police Station along with CSR Original
Receipt
Page No.5/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 06.10.2021
in C.S.No.300 of 2021
Sl. Date Description Nature of
No. document
3 25.08.2021 Copy of complaint filed with the Inspector of Original
Police, Oragadam Police Station along with
Postal Receipt
Copy of complaint filed with the Inspector of
4 25.08.2021 Police, Poonamallee Police Station along Original
with Postal Receipt
Copy of complaint filed with the Inspector of
5 25.08.2021 Police, Kelambakkam Police Station, along Original
with Postal Receipt
Copy of complaint filed with the
6 30.08.2021 Commissioner of Police, Vepery Original
7 05.04.2021 Copy of Board Resolution Original
8 -- Copy of photographs Original
7. From the averments as contained in the plaint, this Court is unable
to appreciate as to the basis of claim for damages to the tune of
Rs.1,02,00,000/- for suffering loss in the business, as no shred of material
has been filed or relied upon to even remotely sustain the claim. The plaint
contains bald averments, as the entire suit has been laid on baseless premise.
This Court finds that, not a minimum effort has been spared by the plaintiff
to come up with a legally acceptable plea to entertain the suit. It appeared as
though that mere mentioning of valuation of Rupees One Crore, the suit can
Page No.6/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 06.10.2021
in C.S.No.300 of 2021
be brought within the Original Side Jurisdiction of this Court, without a
modicum of averments or materials supporting the so-called valuation. As
could be seen from the list of documents extracted supra, they all relate to
the complaints preferred by the plaintiff to the Police and the copy of the
Board Resolution dated 05.04.2021 and copies of the photographs.
8. The plaint is completely bereft of any detail as to the nature of the
operations of the plaintiff-Company, as to how it was affected, how many
days/hours the business operations suffered, etc. Not a single statement has
been made in that regard in the entire plaint.
9. This Court is aghast as to how such bald plaint could be filed for
claiming the damages for a sum of Rs.1,02,00,000/- and expect the suit to
be sustained on the Original Side jurisdiction of this Court.
10. This Court is of the considered view that there is no iota of
material or even a statement in the plaint disclosing the cause of action for
laying the suit on the Original Side jurisdiction of this Court. Even
Page No.7/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 06.10.2021
in C.S.No.300 of 2021
assuming that the plaintiff might have suffered loss due to the alleged
disruptive activities of the defendants 1 and 2, it is incumbent upon the
plaintiff to come up with the details in order to support the claim of
damages.
11. Merely mentioning the figures, is not suffice for the present suit to
be entertained by this Court on the Original Side. On the whole, this Court
finds that there is complete absence of cause of action and also that the
valuation of the suit has been highly fictitious and inflated, the suit cannot
be entertained at all by this Court.
12. For the reasons stated above, the suit stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, Original Applications are closed.
06.10.2021
Speaking Order: Yes
cs
Page No.8/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 06.10.2021
in C.S.No.300 of 2021
V. PARTHIBAN, J
cs
C.S.No.300 of 2021
06.10.2021
Page No.9/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
