AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK LTD Vs. RAVINDER KUMAR SAINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent herein was employed as a Special Teller with the appellant bank. On certain allegations of misconduct, he was served with the charge sheet and departmental inquiry held. The respondent was proceeded ex parte in the said inquiry, in which charges were held as proved and as a consequence he was awarded the punishment of dismissal from service vide orders dated 7.11.1996.

(2.) The appellant herein, which is the defendant in the said suit, filed written statement refuting the various averments made in the plaint. Preliminary objection was also taken to the effect that civil court had no jurisdiction to try the suit as the complete machinery for redressal of the grievance of the respondent was available under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act'). On this objection, following preliminary issue was framed by the learned Single Judge - "Whether this Court has no jurisdiction to try the present suit in view of objections raised by the defendant No.1 in its written statement?" The learned Single Judge has decided the aforesaid issue against the appellant/defendant No.1 vide orders dated 18.4.2006 holding that since the suit is for recovery of damages for his wrongful termination, the jurisdiction of the civil court is not ousted to try such a suit. In this appeal, the said order is impugned by the appellant bank.

(3.) It is not in dispute that the respondent, who was serving as Special Teller, fits into the definition of 'workman' as contained in Section 2(s) of the Act.