SATYA NARAIN SHARMA Vs. RASTRIYA MILL MAZDOOR SANGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated January 25, 1992, passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gulabpura, by which the learned Munsif dismissed the application filed by the defendant and held that the Civil Court had the jurisdiction to try the suit.

(2.) PLAINTIFF Rastriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Kharigaon, Gulabpura, and its Office -bearers Mohammed Ilias and Ors. filed a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction against the defendant Satya Narain Sharma, Bhartiya Textiles Shramik Vikas Sangh, Gulabpura. It is averred in the plaint that the plaintiff is a registered trade union registered under the trade Union Act, 1936 (for short, 'the Act, 1936') and has a right to represent the cases of the workers of its union before the Court under the Industrial Dispute Act, -1947, (for short the Act, 1947). The defendant Satya Narain Sharma in the name of a fake union Bhartiya Textiles Shramik Vikas Sangh, Gulabpura, is collecting the subscription from the labourers by misleading them. The Bhartiya Textiles Shramik vikas Sangh a fake union formed by the defendant Satya Narain Sharma is neither in existence nor has it its own constitution nor has it any duly elected Office -bearers. This union is not even a registered unions. He has opened a branch of this union at various places and all these unions have neither their constitution nor the elected office -bearers. Even these unions are neither in existence nor are they recognized or registered. The defendant Satya Narain Sharma has, also, shown the registered office of his Union at Bhilwara and its sphere of working has, also, been shown at Bhilwara, but he has not even sent the Returns as required under the Trade Union Act to the Registrar. The defendant has got printed the letter head in the names of the defendants No. 2 and 3 and has shown that these unions have been affiliated with the Bhartiya Mill Mazdoor Sangh. It has been further averred that the defendant is threatening the Office -bearers of the plaintiff union and by his illegal acts and with the active connivance of his followers, he is disturbing communal harmony which may result in Hindu -Muslim riots. It is, also, averred in the plaint that the defendants are illegally representing the workers before the Labour Courts. It was, therefore, prayed that by a mandatory injunction, the defendants may be restrained from representing the workmen before various Labour Courts as well as before the Labour Tribunal, Deputy Labour Commissioner and Ors. It was, also, prayed that it may be declared that the unions operated by the defendant No. 1 may be declared as illegal and fake and the defendant may, also, be restrained from collecting the subscription from the workers on behalf of the defendants No. 2 and 3 and the defendant No. 1 be restrained from working on behalf of the defendants No. 2 and 3. It was, also, prayed that this defendant No. 1 may be restrained from holding any gate meeting at the gate of the Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills, Kharigaon (district Bhilwara) and may not create disturbance. This suit was contested by the defendants. During the pendency of the suit, an application was moved by the defendant -petitioner on 13 -7 -92, challenging the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to try the suit. This application was opposed by the plaintiff and the learned Munsif, by its order dated January 25, 1992, dismissed the application filed by the defendant and held that no industrial dispute has been raised in the plaint and, therefore, the suit is triable by the Civil Court. It is against this order that the present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner -defendant.

(3.) THE first question which requires consideration in the present case, therefore, is whether the Registrar of the Trade Union, who is appointed under the Trade Union Act and who is charged with the duty of adjudicating the dispute, has jurisdiction to resolve such type of controversy as has been raised by the plaintiff in the present suit or it is the Civil Court who can try and decide the controversy in the civil suit. Generally the Civil Court has jurisdiction to try the suit for vindication of the existing civil rights unless the jurisdiction is expressly or impliedly ousted by any particular law. The civil Court will have no jurisdiction to try and adjudicate upon a trade dispute if it concerns enforcement of certain rights and liabilities created under the Trade Union Act. The Trade Union Act has been enacted with an object to provide for the registration of the trade unions and in certain respects to define the law relating to the registered unions.