JAVARAIAH Vs. UMESHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants, who are the legal representatives of the 1st defendant, call in question legality of the judgment rendered by the Civil Judge(Sr.Dn.), Bhadravathi allowing the appeal filed by the 1st respondent - plaintiff and remanding the suit to the trial court for disposal.

(2.) Background facts in nutshell are as follows:

(3.) 1st respondent instituted a suit in the trial court by stating that neither the Commissioner nor this Court noticed the important ingredients as to whether the defendant is a workman or not and whether the country sugarcane crusher comes under Section 2(1)(n) of Act and that, the Commissioner has acted against the principles of natural justice. It was further stated that, court has jurisdiction to try the suit as the status of a person can be declared under Section 34 of Specific Relief Act. The relief prayed was, to declare that the plaintiff is not the employer, the defendant is not a workman, working in the crusher and the award is nullity and not binding on the plaintiff. A further prayer to grant permanent injunction from executing the said award was also sought. Tahsildar - Shimoga, the executing authority was subsequently impleaded as the 2nd defendant.