Find a Lawyer

Miscellaneous Application No. 12,7 of 1972, decided on 17^th July 11972.

Ad interim injunction Applicant Present: Shaft Muhammad R. Akhund, Chairman Workers having filed appeal before Labour Tribunal against ad interim and Kassam Usman Kandawala, Member Employee Injunction order of Labour Court simultaneously making application before Labour Court seeking setting aside of same-Held, though there was no specific bar for filling such application during pendency of appeal, applicant cannot seek remedy in two forums simultaneously which may result into conflicting decisions-Civil procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXIX, r. 4 & S. 10.

Mahmood A. Ghana for Applicants.

Wasi Ahmad for Respondents.

In this application under Order XXXIX, rule 4, C. P. C., the applicants seek setting aside the order of Ad interim Injunction granted to the respondent-Union by this Court on 13th June 1972.

The Ad interim Injunction was granted, as the result of an application moved by the respondent-Union, restraining the applicants from dismissing, discharging, retrenching, laying off or terminating the services of the members of the respondent-Union on any account including closure of business or re-organisation, during rte pendency of their application under section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969.

The case of the applicants in this application, as well as in the previous one is that, on account of the loss of market in East to Pakistan and reduction of sales in West Pakistan, there has been accumulation of stock worth Rs. 16 lakhs. Consequently, they W are contemplating re-organisation of their business as the result of which they will have to retrench surplus staff to the extent of 63 workers from service. They further state that the workers have resorted to organised go-slow, both before and after the n order of Ad interim Injunction, causing further financial loss to their business. Since the applicants cannot take any action against them on account of the Ad interim Injunction they have moved this application for setting it aside.

The respondent-Union have pleaded, inter alia, that the applicants have also tiled an appeal against the order of Ad interim injunction, which is pending before the Sind Labour Appellate Tribunal. The Representative for the applicants, while admitting that an appeal is pending, states that there is no specific bar for filing the present application on account of the pending appeal. I am afraid with this contention of the learned Re presentative I am unable to agree. He cannot seek the same remedy in two forums at the same time, which may result into conflicting decisions. The principle laid down in section 10 of the Civil Procedure Coda clearly applies in the present case. Consequently, the present application is stayed till the decision of the appeal.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.