Bombay High Court
Uber India Systems Private Limited vs Baghtoy Rikshawala Union on 23 July, 2025
Author: R.I. Chagla
Bench: R.I. Chagla
904-IA(L) 22587.2025 in S(L) 22578.2025.doc
Kavita S.J.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 22587 OF 2025
IN
SUIT (L) NO. 22578 OF 2025
Uber India Systems Private Limited ...Applicant/
Plaintiff
Versus
Baghtoy Rikshawala Union & Ors., ...Defendants
----------
Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar, Senior Counsel a/w Mr. Aditya Mehta, Mr.
Aviral Sahai, Mr. Manan Shah and Mr. Devanshu Anada i/b Cyril
Amarchand Mangaldas for the Applicant/Plaintiff.
----------
CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA, J.
DATED : 23rd JULY, 2025.
ORDER :
1. The Interim Application has been moved on the ground for urgency as stated in Paragraph 83 of the Plaint viz. there exists extreme and immediate urgency in the matter warranting the grant of ex-parte ad-interim reliefs in view of the unlawful and violent actions initiated by the Defendants which have included organized KAVITA SUSHIL JADHAV intimidation, assault and forced offline conduct of the Driver - Digitally signed by KAVITA SUSHIL JADHAV Date: 2025.07.23 16:15:00 +0530 Partners having led to a rapidly escalating situation on the ground. 1/8 ::: Uploaded on - 23/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 07:39:00 :::
904-IA(L) 22587.2025 in S(L) 22578.2025.doc The Plaintiff has stated that it is facing continuing disruption of its business operations and the Driver-Partners and the Passengers are at immediate risk of harm, coercion and public inconvenience. Each day compounds the loss suffered by the Plaintiff, deprives the law- abiding Driver-Partners of their livelihood and imperils the safety and interest of the Passengers. It is stated that if notice is given prior to grant of ad-interim relief, there is a grave and reasonable apprehension that the Defendants and persons acting at their behest may precipitate matters including by accelerating or intensifying their acts of violence, intimidation and public disorder, making it impossible to restore normalcy and safeguard lawful rights.
2. Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Plaintiff/Applicant has referred to the notice issued by the Senior Police, Chikhali Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, Commissionerate dated 13th July, 2025. Further, he has referred to a Notice issued by the Assistant Police Inspector, Baner Police Station, Pune City Police dated 17th July, 2025. The first of these notices is issued to the members of Swapan Kanya Sanghatana, wherein they have been notified that while conducting awareness campaign, they should ensure that no individual's sentiments or feelings are hurt. 2/8 ::: Uploaded on - 23/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 07:39:00 :::
904-IA(L) 22587.2025 in S(L) 22578.2025.doc This is in the context of the joint protest by auto-rickshaw drivers, delivery boys and IGF Union members who were planning to boycott app-based services Ola, Uber and Rapido. The purpose of this protest was purportedly to raise awareness among citizens and other vehicle drivers. By the second of the Notices dated 17 th July, 2025 issued to the Defendants' Group, reference was made that the instructions by Keshav Kshirsagar i.e. Defendant No.3 on behalf of the IGF organization, to prevent other Ola/Uber drivers from working, in protest of the Ola/Uber rate hike. This action was considered to be illegal. The Notice accordingly states that the peace of the surrounding area should not be disturbed and in the event it is, the said IGF Organization on whose behalf the Defendant No.3 is attempting to carry out the aforementioned actions, would be fully responsible for violation of this notice and action will be initiated against them.
3. Mr. Tulzapurkar has further referred to the Online complaints made by Passengers of Uber vehicles regarding the strike carried out by the Defendants' Group and by which the Drivers were being stopped and prevented from proceeding. 3/8 ::: Uploaded on - 23/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 07:39:00 :::
904-IA(L) 22587.2025 in S(L) 22578.2025.doc
4. Mr. Tulzapurkar has submitted that the reason for moving on ground of urgency is that from 23 rd July, 2024 i.e. from 12.00 noon onwards all the vehicles of the Plaintiff are threatened by the Defendants to be not only stopped but also damaged. He has referred to a Photograph of one of the Uber Vehicles, whose rear windscreen had been damaged.
5. Mr. Tulzapurkar has referred to a case, where this Court had passed an Order dated 20th March, 2017 passed in Notice of Motion (L) No.664 of 2017 in Suit (L) No.198 of 2017 in a similar situation as in the present case. The Defendants therein as in this case were stopping / blocking the cars of the Driver - Partners of the Plaintiff as and / or otherwise hampering, obstructing, interfering in the legitimate business of Plaintiff and causing violence. The Defendants therein had as in the present case initiated protests / strikes and made certain unreasonable demands in the garb of the said protests / strikes. This Court had by the said order granted similar reliefs as sought for in the present Interim Application.
6. Mr. Tulzapurkar has accordingly sought for ad-interim relief in terms of prayer Clauses (a), (b) and (d) (as modified by 4/8 ::: Uploaded on - 23/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 07:39:00 ::: 904-IA(L) 22587.2025 in S(L) 22578.2025.doc restricting to prayer Clauses (a) & (b)) of the Interim Application. He has not pressed the prayer Clause (c) at this stage.
7. Having considered the above submission, I find that a case has been made out for seeking ex-parte ad-interim relief, which has also been pleaded in Paragraph 83 of the Plaint. The documents annexed to the Plaint clearly show that there is a likelihood of the Defendants stopping and damaging the vehicles of the Plaintiff from 12.00 noon today and given the past action of the Defendants, this will not be peaceful.
8. Accordingly, I am of the prima facie view that necessary ad-interim injunction orders are required to be passed to prevent such illegal actions on behalf of the Defendants.
9. The Plaintiffs have made out a strong prima facie case for grant of ex-parte ad-interim relief. There shall be an ad-interim order in terms of prayer Clauses (a), (b) and (d) (as modified) against all the Defendants including the unknown Defendants till further orders, as under:
5/8 ::: Uploaded on - 23/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 07:39:00 :::
904-IA(L) 22587.2025 in S(L) 22578.2025.doc "(a) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass an order and temporary injunction restraining the Defendants by themselves their members, affiliates, representatives, followers, agents, employees and / or or person(s) acting through or under them, from stopping / blocking the cars of the Driver - Partners of the Plaintiff or removing / confiscating the devices installed in their cars or physically assaulting / threatening the Driver -
Partners or the Passengers using the Uber App and in any manner hampering, obstructing, interfering in the legitimate business of the Plaintiff and in this regard, causing violence of any sort or in any manner;
(b) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Joint Commissioner of Police (Traffic), or any other officer of equal or superior rank nominated by the Commissioner of Police, to forthwith, on being approached by the Plaintiff, ensure through the Senior Police Inspector of the relevant local police station that 6/8 ::: Uploaded on - 23/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 07:39:00 ::: 904-IA(L) 22587.2025 in S(L) 22578.2025.doc all Driver - Partners willing to operate through the Uber App, and all vehicles operated by such Driver - Partners, are not stopped, blocked, or otherwise prevented from plying on the roads and that neither their vehicles nor their mobile devices are subjected to damage, seizure, or confiscation; and to further provide all necessary police aid and protection to the Plaintiff, its employees, Driver - Partners, and the property or offices of the Plaintiff for the implementation of any protective and injunctive orders passed by this Hon'ble Court, to preclude any act of violence, coercion, intimidation, obstruction, or unlawful assembly at or near the Plaintiff's premises or place of business;
(d) That pending hearing and final disposal of the Suit, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass an order of injunction in terms of [Clause (a) and (b)] above restraining such unknown Defendants, details in respect whereof are not readily available with the Plaintiff."
10. The Plaintiffs shall file Affidavit in terms of Order XXXIX 7/8 ::: Uploaded on - 23/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 07:39:00 ::: 904-IA(L) 22587.2025 in S(L) 22578.2025.doc Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 after serving of present Interim Application and Plaint and the present order.
11. The Joint Commissioner of Police (Traffic) shall be served with this order by the Advocate for the Plaintiff and upon service, the Joint Commissioner of Police (Traffic) shall also serve this order on the Defendants.
12. Place the Interim Application on 6 th August, 2025 for further ad-interim relief.
13. The parties to act upon the authenticated copy of this order.
[R.I. CHAGLA, J.] 8/8 ::: Uploaded on - 23/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 07:39:00 :::