1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT (L) NO.255 OF 2011 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO.________ OF 2011 Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Plaintiff versus Maharashtra Mathadi and General Kamgar Union and others Defendants Mr.J.P.Cama, Sr.Counsel a/w R.S.Pai i/by M/s.Sanjay Udeshi & Co. for plaintiff. Mr.Suresh Pakale i/by Kiran Kumar Phakade for defendant no.1. Mr.A.M.Khandekar i/by M.S.Topkar for defendant no.3. CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 7th February 2011 PC : 1. By this suit the plaintiff has sought compensation/damages from the defendants of Rs.51,000/- as per the particulars of claim being Exhibit- E to the plaint. The plaintiff has also sought permanent injunction against the defendants in terms of prayer clause (b) of the suit which read as under :- "(b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a permanent injunction restraining Defendant Nos.1 to 3 and its members or any of the office bearers of the Defendant Unions from - (i) resorting to acts such as obstructing and/or disrupting movement of trucks/vehicles carrying LPG Cylinders of Plaintiff Company to and from LPG Plant at Mahul to locations of the Distributors; (ii) threatening or assaulting crew of the truck or any of the employees of the plaintiff; 2 (iii) resorting to any agitational activities as threatened in the Strike Notices dated 25.1.2011 and 27.1.2011 being Exhibits B-1 to B-3 hereto; (iv) preventing the ingress and egress of any of the employees, customers, visitors of the plaintiff or movement of trucks/vehicles at the entrance/office/locations of the Refinery of the plaintiff at Mahul, Chembur, Mumbai." 2. The plaintiff has taken out the above Notice of Motion seeking temporary injunction in terms of the permanent injunction sought in the plaint. 3. Mr.Pakle, learned advocate appearing for the defendant no.1 has tendered an affidavit dated 7th February 2011. Mr.Pakle has denied all the allegations made by the plaintiff against the defendants. Mr.Pakle has also stated on behalf of the defendant no.1 that the defendant no.1 is a very responsible union and they shall not resort to any illegal obstruction and/or disruption of the movements of the trucks/vehicles carrying LPG Cylinders of the plaintiff to and from LPG Plant at Mahul to any location whatsoever nor would they threaten or assault the crew of the trucks and/or any employee/visitors of the plaintiff. The defendant no.1 shall maintain industrial peace and not prevent the ingress and egress of any of the employee/ customers/visitors of the plaintiff in any manner whatsoever. The defendant no.1 shall not cause any damage to the property of the plaintiff. The above statements made on behalf of defendant no.1 are accepted as undertakings given to this Court on behalf of the defendant no.1. Learned advocate appearing for the defendant no. 3 states that his client-the defendant no.3 undertakes to abide by the above statements/undertakings made on behalf of defendant no.1. However, it is clarified that the above statements shall in no way preclude the defendants from raising any contentions in any proceedings taken out by the defendants as per law. It is also clarified that the defendants are by this order not restrained from carrying out any peaceful demonstration and/or dharna as per law. 3 4. In view of the above, the plaintiff is not pressing for damages and the suit is accordingly disposed of. Refund of court fees, if any, as per rules. The Notice of Motion also stands disposed of. Learned senior advocate for the plaintiff undertakes on behalf of the plaintiff to get the Suit as well as Notice of Motion numbered within a period of one week from today. (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.)