Delhi District Court
Cmc Ltd vs Cmc Ivth Class Workers' Union on 29 November, 2014
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE 16
CENTRAL DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
CS No. 688/14/96
I.D.No.02401C6139432004
CMC Ltd.
2nd Floor, Jeevan Vihar Building,
Parliament Street, New Delhi110001
Through
its General Manager Northern Region .....Plaintiff
Versus
1 CMC IVth Class Workers' Union
310B, Tekhand Near Okhla PhaseI,
New Delhi110020.
(through its President)
2 Sri Kunwar Singh Bisht
19/2, Durga Park Dallu Pura
Delhi110096
3 Mr. Basant Verma
A46, Pratap Nagar, Mayur ViharPhaseI,
New Delhi110091
4 Delhi Multi Storeyed Building Employees Congress
12B Vandana Basement, 11 Tolstoy Marg
New Delhi110001 (through its President)
5 Sri Raj Kumar
President
Delhi Multi Storeyed Building Employees Congress
12B Vandana Basement, 11 Tolstoy Marg
New Delhi110001
CS No.688/14/96 CMC Ltd. Vs. CMC IVth Class Workers' Union Page No.1 of 9
6 Sri Kamlesh Chauhan
Sindhu Farm Road, Block B, Gali No. 5B,
Village Mithapur Vistai, PO Badarpur
Delhi110044
7 Sri Chunni Lal Yadav
F5 Pocket B5, Mayur Vihar, PhaseIII
New Delhi110091
8 Sri Jawad Akbar
RZ5/218, West Sagar Pur JBlock
New Delhi
9 Sri Satish Sharma
G112A, Sangam Vihar
New Delhi110062
10 Sri Yash Pal
E46 Village and PO Gadaipur
New Delhi110030
11 Sri Shyam Sharma
C322A 43/44, Street7
Sudmna Puri Chowk, Gauri Extension
Delhi - 110007
12 Sri Chander Singh Rana
H No. J540, Dr. Ambedkar Nagar
New Delhi110062
13 Sri Latoor Singh
B125, Major B R Enclave,
Pochanpur Delhi110061
14 Sri Gulbir Singh
Son of Sri Hari Singh
CS No.688/14/96 CMC Ltd. Vs. CMC IVth Class Workers' Union Page No.2 of 9
C/o C D Security Services Network Ltd.
C D House, 3B, Masjid Moth
Opp. National Chest Institute
New Delhi110049
15 Sri Hari Prasad Meena
S/o Sri Jairam Meena
C/o C D Security Services Network Ltd.
C D House, 3B, Masjid Moth
Opp. National Chest Institute
New Delhi110049
16 Sri Batinder Prasad
Son of Ramadhar Singh
C/o C D Security Services Network Ltd.
C D House, 3B, Masjid Moth
Opp. National Chest Institute
New Delhi110049
17 Sri Bankey Bihari Singh
Son of Sri Ram Dhyan Singh
C/o C D Security Services Network Ltd.
C D House, 3B, Masjid Moth
Opp.National Chest Institute
New Delhi110049
18 Sri Prem Kant Jha
Son of Sri B Jha
C/o C D Security Services Network Ltd.
C D House, 3B, Masjid Moth
Opp. National Chest Institute
New Delhi110049
CS No.688/14/96 CMC Ltd. Vs. CMC IVth Class Workers' Union Page No.3 of 9
19 Sri Surinder Kumar
Son of Sri Rameshwar Dayal
C/o C D Security Services Network Ltd.
C D House, 3B, Masjid Moth
Opp. National Chest Institute
New Delhi110049
20 Sri Nand Lal
C/o P J Refrigeration Engineer 25/11, Connaught Place
New Delhi110001
21 Sri Joginder Singh
C/o M/S S S Placement Services B5, Kundan House
16, Nehru Place, New Delhi110019
22 Sri Digpal Singh
C/o M/S S S Placement Services B5, Kundan House
16, Nehru Place, New Delhi110019
23 Sri Pratap Verma
C/o M/S S S Placement Services B5, Kundan House
16, Nehru Place, New Delhi110019
24 M/s Unique Cooperative Labour and Construction Society
1567/4 Bajaj Gali, Kotla Mubarakpur
New Delhi 110010
25 C D Security Services Network Ltd.
C D Home, 3B, Masjid Moth
Opp.National Chest Institute
New Delhi110049
(through its Managing Director)
26 M/s S S Placement Services
B5, Kundan House, 16, Nehru Place
CS No.688/14/96 CMC Ltd. Vs. CMC IVth Class Workers' Union Page No.4 of 9
New Delhi110019
(through its Proprietor Mrs. Usha Nair)
27 P J Refrigeration Engineers
25/11, Connaught Place
New Delhi110001
(through its Proprietor Paramjit Singh)
28 M/s Professional Group
4/20, WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi
(through its Proprietor Mr. Chetan Bhandari)
29 M/s Bhiduri Enterprises
248, A Tekchand, New Delhi110020
(through its Proprietor Mr. P.S.Verma)
30 M/s Trio Security and Intelligence (P) Ltd.
I36, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi110024
(through its Managing Director) .....Defendants
Date of institution of case : 13.11.1996
Date of judgment reserved : 18.11.2014
Date of judgment pronounced : 29.11.2014
SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION
JUDGEMENT
1) The present suit has been filed by one SH. S.K.Sehgal on behalf of the plaintiff claiming himself as its General Manager and duly authorized and competent to file the suit. It is averred that the plaintiff is a Government of India enterprise incorporated under the CS No.688/14/96 CMC Ltd. Vs. CMC IVth Class Workers' Union Page No.5 of 9 Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in computer maintenance services to various Customers in India and abroad which includes providing of services to virtually all departments of the Government. It is averred that the plaintiff has its offices / branches all our India including Delhi. It is averred that the plaintiff for the requirements of works pertaining to watch and ward functions, canteen services, housekeeping services, electric maintenance services etc have awarded the contracts to numbers of parties. It is alleged that the defendant no. 1, 2 and 4 are writing letters to the plaintiff from time to time demanding various benefits to the Employees of the Contractors who have been providing various services to the plaintiff. It is submitted that the plaintiff has number of times maintained a stand that the grievances are a matter between the Contractors and their employees but the defendants had been threatening in the garb of peaceful agitation to obstruct and paralyse the day to day functioning of the plaintiff and the instances of physical threatening and preventing the workers from doing their duties have been brought into the knowledge of the police authorities and Labour Commissioner but without any result. The plaintiff has prayed for a permanent injunction against the defendant or any person acting through them restraining from interfering / obstructing ingress and egress of the CS No.688/14/96 CMC Ltd. Vs. CMC IVth Class Workers' Union Page No.6 of 9 Officers, Employees, Customers and in any manner directly or indirectly preventing the plaintiff from carrying on its business at the premises at Delhi and to restrain them from holding demonstration etc within a radius of atleast 200 meters from the offices of plaintiff.
2) A joint written statement was filed on behalf of defendant no. 1 to 23 raising the objections to the suit of the plaintiff that the employment of contract workers from the job is prohibited by the Government by a notification and Officers of the plaintiff are liable to be prosecuted as they are engaged through various Contractors to engage the workers on contract. The defendants have denied the averments of the plaintiff that they are threatening the officials of the plaintiff as alleged. It is claimed that the defendants are all peace loving and law abiding citizen and shall never resort to any illegal activities and that the threats of the plaintiff is without any basis. Defendant no. 24, 27 and 29 also filed separate written statements opposing the suit of the plaintiff on the similar pleas.
3) The plaintiff in the replications filed reiterated and reaffirmed the averments made in the plaint.
4) After completion of the pleadings following issues were framed by Ld. Predecessor of this court vide order dated 08.11.2004 : 1 Whether defendants no. 2,3,6 to 23 are the direct CS No.688/14/96 CMC Ltd. Vs. CMC IVth Class Workers' Union Page No.7 of 9 employees of the plaintiff in view of para 7 of the WS of defendant no. 1 to 23? OPD 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of permanent injunction against the defendants as prayed for ? OPP 3 Relief.
5) One witness Sh. Umesh Chandra Joshi, the Manager of the plaintiff has been examined in support of case of the plaintiff whereas witness is examined by the defendants.
6) I have heard the submissions of the Ld. Counsel appearing for the plaintiff and none appeared on behalf of the defendants and have perused the case file with his assistance.
My issue wise findings are as under :
7) Issue No. 1
The onus to prove the issue was laid upon the defendants. No witness has been examined by the defendants to discharge the onus hence issue is decided against the defendants.
8) Issue no. 2 It is claimed by the plaintiff that the defendants are threatening the employees of the plaintiff and are raising slogans while demonstrating CS No.688/14/96 CMC Ltd. Vs. CMC IVth Class Workers' Union Page No.8 of 9 at the premises of the plaintiff. It is claimed by the defendant in the written statement that the services of employees through Contractors is unlawful. If the plaintiff is engaged in any unlawful activities the defendants have right to approach the authority concern and they cannot create obstructions in the working of the plaintiff. The defendants have no right to issue any threats to the officials or clients of the plaintiff. The plaintiff is entitled for restraining orders against the defendants in regard to their unlawful acts. Issue decided accordingly.
9) Relief.
In view of the abovesaid discussion, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed and the defendants or any person claiming through them is directed not to held any demonstration causing interference/ obstructions in the ingress and egress of the officials of the plaintiff within a periphery of 200 meter around the premises of the plaintiff and its officers. The plaintiff is also entitled to costs of the suit. Decree Sheet be prepared accordingly.
Announced in Open Court (Sunil Chaudhary)
th
On 29 November, 2014 ADJ16 (Central) THC
Delhi.
CS No.688/14/96 CMC Ltd. Vs. CMC IVth Class Workers' Union Page No.9 of 9