Court No. - 1 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 884 of 2010 Petitioner :- The Oudh Sugar Mills Limited,Hargaon Sitapur Thru E.Presiden Respondent :- Civil Judge (Senior Div.) Sitapur & Ors. Petitioner Counsel :- Sudeep Kumar,A.K. Pandey Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,K.S. Pawar Hon'ble Pradeep Kant,J.
Hon’ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.
Notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 8 has been accepted by the learned
Chief Standing Counsel and on behalf of respondent no.9, by Sri K.S. Pawar.
Issue notice to respondents 2 to 7.
Steps be taken both ways.
Learned counsel for the petitioner says that he may also be allowed to serve
the respondents outside the Court. Let him do so. Office is directed to issue
dasti notices and its necessary duplicates on completion of necessary
formalities within 24 hours.
Let the matter be listed on 22.2.2010, as fresh.
Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Sudeep Kumar, assailing the order
passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sitapur dated 21.1.2010,
by means of which, he has ordered for maintaining status quo with respect to
the centre, which has been established at village Sohraiya against the
directions issued by the Cane Commissioner to establish the Cane Centre at
revenue village Ratanganj-Second, submitted that;
1. the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sitapur
is not only without jurisdiction but also a mala fide order, as in the
previous years also, the same court had passed similar orders, which
orders became the subject- matter of challenge before this Court in
several writ petitions and one such order was under challenge in Writ
Petition No. 554 (MB) of 2009, in re: The Oudh Sugar Mills Ltd. vs.
Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sitapur and others, wherein a Division
Bench of this Court, while admitting the writ petition, also passed an
interim order staying the operation of the order passed by the Civil
Judge;
2. the suit itself is barred by the provisions of Section 15 of the Essential
Commodities Act and the sugar being an essential commodity, interim
injunction could not have been granted in view of Section 12-B of the
Act;
3. the learned Civil Judge without getting the party impleaded, who was
to be affected by such an order, namely, the present petitioner, Oudh
Sugar Mills Ltd., in whose reserved area village Sohraiya falls, could
not have granted any injunction nor the suit could have been
entertained;
4. the suit itself is a collusive suit, as the plaintiffs, namely, respondents 2
to 6, who are cane-growers, in their individual capacity filed the suit
impleading Dalmia Chini Mills, who had established their centre in
village Sohraiya instead of installing it at revenue village Ratanganj-
Second, and on their admission that the centre is to be shifted from
Sohraiya to revenue village Ratanganj-Second, no injunction could
have been granted. Individual cane growers were not having any locus
standi to file the suit, much less when the society itself was not
impleaded at all in the suit.
The suit was filed concealing the material facts and in particular, various
orders passed by the Cane Commissioner in which the Cane Commissioner
had required the Dalmia Chini Mills to shift and establish their centre in
revenue village Ratanganj-Secondand to remove the Centre from village
Sohraiya, which is in reserved area of Oudh Sugar Mills and also the report of
the Committee, which had found that the present centre established by the
Dalmia Chini Mills several kilometers away from revenue village Ratanganj-
Second society and inside village Sohraiya. One of such orders has been
brought on record. We have also seen the interim order passed by a Division
Bench of this Court on 20.1.09, as referred to above.
We are, prima facie, satisfied that the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division),
Sitapur was having no jurisdiction or authority to entertain the suit or pass an
injunction order, nor the suit was maintainable, not only because it was filed
concealing material facts and the orders passed by the Cane Commissioner
and it being a collusive suit between the few cane-growers and the Dalmia
Chini Mills, and was filed so as to allow the Dalmia Chini Mills to continue
with their existing Centre at Sohraiya, despite the orders passed by the Cane
Commissioner, but also it was barred by the provisions of Section 15 of the
Essential Commodities Act and interim injunction could not have been
granted in view of Section 12-B of the Act.
We, therefore, stay the operation of the order dated 21.1.2010 passed by the
learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sitapur., till further orders of the Court.
We also take notice of the statement of learned counsel for the petitioner that
this is the same court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Sitapur, which had
passed the orders earlier and which became the subject-matter of litigation
before this Court in earlier petitions. This calls for an explanation from the
Civil Judge (Senior Division) to show cause as to under which authority he
has entertained the suit and granted interim injunction in question, specially
when he was already made aware about the orders passed in the earlier writ
petition in the application for impleadment, filed by the present petitioner
Oudh Sugar Mills on 20.1.2010, wherein all the aforesaid facts were stated,
and how he ignored the provisions of the aforesaid Sections, in particular,
Section 15 of the Essential Commodities Act. He shall submit his explanation
to this Court within two weeks.
Order Date :- 2.2.2010
LN/-