Capt. Sukhdev Singh Lt Cdr ® Indian Navy Phone: 66951688, mob: 9821291594

Yüklə 26,44 Kb.
ölçüsü26,44 Kb.

Capt. Sukhdev Singh

Lt Cdr ® Indian Navy

Phone: 66951688, mob: 9821291594

B-103, Bldg. No.-2, G. E. Links,

Ram Mandir Road, Goregaon (W)

Mumbai- 400 104

01 November, 2011

Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction

Bombay High Court

Suit No. 527/2005

and Notice of Motions

Capt. Sukhdev Singh . . . Plaintiff /Complainant


  1. The Great Eastern Shipping Company Limited …Defendant No.1

  1. The Maritime Union of India …Defendant No.2

(Party to agreement of my employment, i.e. MUI – INSA Agreement with the ship owners)

  1. The Great Offshore Limited … Defendant No.3

(They are a third party, jumped in without jurisdiction to mislead the Hon’ble courts to delay justice)


A worst kind of victimisation of an employee

SUIT No. 527 of 2005 (EXPEDITED IN 2007)

  1. I am an ex Indian Armed forces officer Indian Navy honored by the Hon’ble President of India commissioned rank Lt Cdr. I am recipient of various service medals for my distinguished service.

  2. 1991, joined Merchant Navy and sailed on board various merchant vessels of Indian and Foreign Shipping companies.1997 -joined the Defendant No.1 Company as senior Master on contract basis.

  3. 1998 -Defendant No.1 appointed me as a Senior Master on permanent basis, under “Maritime Union of India – Indian National ship owners association” Agreement of employment with 10th year wage scale of a master. Received various commendations from the Defendant No.1 and their client for my good work on board their vessels.

  1. While sailing on board their vessels as a senior Mater I in good faith, to avoid any serious accident on board my vessel, which already happened on other vessels of the Defendant Company, and to improve performance onboard my vessels, I pointed out certain deficiencies to the defendant No.1.The concerned Officials /Managers, fearing their exposure, became hostile to me. Who started targeting me, to victimize and to throw me out job is well explained in plaint of the suit. I managed working under these stressed conditions for some time, but when the things became unbearable to me, in December 2002 I apprised the management of the Defendant Company viz. M. D. Mr. Vijay K Sheth and Vice President Mr. Garish Trivedi, of my grievances, difficulties and my bullying at work.

  1. March 2003 -Proceeded on 45 days leave giving readiness to re-join vessel by End May in writing to the Defendant No.1. In spite of my readiness, repeated calls and requests to the Defendant I am not posted onboard their vessel, they had kept me standby under their orders / ins suspense without paying me legally due staff wages under clause 77 of my agreement of employment. I tried my best but all my efforts to resolve the issue amicably with the Management failed. Exhibits in support to my submission are annexed to the Plaint.

  1. 20.9.2004 -the Defendant No.1 issued me letter dated 20.9.2004 terminating my services and refusing me any further employment on board any of their vessels. I Reported the matter to the Maritime Union of India, Directorate of Shipping, Shipping master Mumbai and the Chairman and Managing Director of the Defendant Company. However, no relief came from anywhere.

  1. 25.11.2004 I sent a legal notice again giving my readiness and projecting my grievances to the Defendant No.1 through my advocates (Now my erstwhile advocates) but no reply to that notice is received from defendant No.1 to date.

  2. 24.12.2004, the advocates lodged a Writ Petition lodging No.3844 on 22.12.2004 in Bombay High Court under, and took out a NMS 289/2004.

  1. 31.12.2004 The Hon’ble Court of Shri Justice S.U. Kamdar granted me ad-interim relief of Rs. 1,00,000.00 on 31.12.2004 and made the matter returnable on 15.02.2005, it never appeared on board as directed.

  1. 25.02.2005 w/o my knowledge the Writ petition got converted into the Suit No. 527/2005 without any substantive prayers for relief in the Plaint. The reasons are best known to my erstwhile advocates.

  1. 03.02.2005, The Defendant Company realising that this illegal termination will make them liable to pay damages to camouflage their illegal acts issued a letter dated 03.02.2005 for disciplinary action against me without any specific charges.

  1. 09.02.2005 the letter was replied by my advocates. Stating that “this act of the Defendant is an affront to the Hon’ble Court and interference with course of justice since the matter is subjudice”.

  1. 14.02.2005 Defendant No.1’s advocates letter dated 14.02.2005 addressed to the Maritime Union of India and my advocates M/s Consulta Juris accepting the Plaintiff in their service and indicating their intentions of framing some charges and initiating enquiry against the Plaintiff. Although, No Show cause notice, Charge sheet or Enquiry was pending against me till this time. My service record was exemplary one, since I had received many letters of commendation from the Defendant and their clients for my good work
  2. 10.03.2005 the Defendant No.1 filed a joint reply affidavit to NMS 289/2005 and to the Plaint” accepting the Plaintiff in their service, and inter-ally making submission on oath that Services of the Plaintiff are not even terminated under clause 30 of the MUI – INSA Agreement. But, making various false allegations on oath against the Plaintiff to mislead the Hon’ble Court.

  3. 30.03.2005, Defendant No.1 took an extract from their above reply affidavit (clause 16) and issued it as charge sheet dated 30.03.2005, with a very Special charge which is worth bringing to the notice of this Hon’ble court:

charge No.12- You have proceeded to Bombay High Court against the company and defamed the company’s reputation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . therefore, you are guilty”. The Defendant No.1 to trouble me physically and mentally deliberately dragged this enquiry for more then a year, without paying me my legally due staff wages. One of their own people Mr. SD Paldesai, who have not even seen a ship properly, was appointed as Enquiry officer to probe into the charges on the professional issues against the Plaintiff i.e. a senior ship Master having more then 30 years of sea experience. The Defendant No.1 made mockery of natural justice and professionalism.

  1. My erstwhile advocates were probably won over by the Defendant, they at many times kept themselves away from the Court proceedings. The matter did not come or board nor mentioned by them. The Court passed orders in NMS 289/2004 & 1189/2005 and granted liberty tor amend the Plaint and take out fresh NMS for interim reliefs. This was never done by the advocates.

  2. The Chamber summons No. 508/2006 challenging the illegal enquiry and Charge sheet and adding substantive prayers in the plaint was filed by me it first came up before the Hon’ble Court of Shri Justice S.C. Dharmadhikari on 02.05.2006 and was made returnable on 12.06.2006, but it did not appear on board for more than one year.

  3. 05.06.2006 As pre-planned, the Defendants sent me a letter dated 05.06.2006, allegedly terminating my services with two years retrospective effect 14.04.2004, under clause 30 of my agreement of employment. (To which they had already denied on oath in clause 7-f of their affidavit dated 01.03.2005). The Defendants also, directed the Plaintiff to refund within fifteen days Rs.100,000.00 ad-interim relief granted by orders of the Hon’ble court on 31.3.2004 and shown the same as deduction from My EP Fund. The above acts of the Defendant No.1 are contempt of the Hon’ble High Court.

  4. Then followed threats to scare me and my family to force me for affixing my signature on the vouchers. Threatening phone calls were received at my residence, for which I had already lodged a Police Complaints against the Defendants in Goregaon Police Station. These acts of the Defendant are blatant affront to the course of justice.

  5. 25.06.2007 Plaintiff started appearing in person before the Hon’ble Courts, Considering the nature and urgency of my matter the Hon’ble Court of Shri Justice SR Sathe was pleased to order for proceeding with this matter expeditiously.

  6. 17.7.2007 The Hon’ble Court of Shri Justice S.C.Dharamadhikari permitted the Plaintiff to amend the plaint by CHS 508/2006. The Plaint has been amended.

  1. Plaintiff took out Notice of Motion 2514/ 2007 & 3514 /2007 highlighting bad in law acts of perjury by the Defendant’s officials and added Chairman, MD, and other officials as party (In this Notice of Motion only) with prayers for disciplinary action against them under 195 Cr pc. The Director General of Shipping and Employees Provident fund Commissioner Bandra were also added as Respondents. The Hon’ble Justice. S.C.Dharmadhikari issued order to hear this Motion along with Suit. On request of the Plaintiff Bombay High Court issued Writ of summons the Accused/ Defendants /Respondents, however the Defendants being big corporation used their power and influence and never replied / appeared before the Court.

  2. A third party Third party Great offshore limited started filing submissions on behalf of Defendant No.1 pretending as Defendant No.1. The Court of Shri Justice D.Y.Chandrachud dismissed the NMS No. 4937/2007 who filed submissions without any jurisdiction to mislead the court.

  1. 12.8.2008: To bring misconduct of this third party on record, Plaintiff added Great offshore as party Defendant No.3 by Chamber Summons which were allowed and plaint is amended.

  2. 18 September 2008 Hon’ble court of Shri Justice VM Kanade passed an order for framing issues/affidavit of documents /affidavit of evidence. Affidavit of documents and evidence by both the parties are filed and inspection taken. The issues are framed but needs some change for which proceedings as per order of the court are taken out and are pending hearing.

  3. 20 February 2009, The Defendant No.1, i.e. the Great eastern shipping co. went for appeal against the order dated 12.8.2008 before the Division bench comprising of Hon’ble Chief Justice and Justice D.Y.Chandrachud. The defendant No.1 wanted altogether to remove their name from the Suit itself. Senior Counsel Mr. Varinder Tuljapurkar appeared on their behalf, but their appeal was dismissed on merit.

  4. The Defendants in their Reply Affidavit filed in the year of 2009 has tried to mislead the Hon’ble Court by making false submission on oath that Plaintiff’s services are

terminating my with two years retrospective effect 14.04.2004, under clause 30 of my agreement of employment which is already denied by them in their earlier affidavit dated 10.3.2005. The above acts of the Defendant No.1 are contempt of the Hon’ble High Court is punishable under Cr.pc. act.

  1. The Defendants are a big Corporation, are fully aware of the consequences of deliberately making false submissions on oath with malafide intentions to mislead the Hon’ble court and to victimise the innocent Employee and my family. They have also caused Loss to Nation by arbitrarily keeping a Competent Indian Ship Master off work for many years. The Hon’ble Court may be pleased initiate appropriate action and put exemplary cost to avoid such malafide acts in future.

  2. Now in December/January 2010-2011. This above notice of motions 2514 & 3415 were decided to be heard by another single judge Justice Ganoo who dismissed these motions without the Defendant parties appearing /replying to the summons. The Plaintiff went for appeal against these orders, the appeal No. 189 of 2011 & 269 (L) without allowing the Plaintiff much argument, the division bench comprising by Hon’ble division bench Justice D.Y.Chandrachud and Shri Justice Anoop V Mohta by order dated 12.7.2011 disposed off the appeals. The Hon’ble division bench issued verbal assurance to that the Plaintiff that he will get his dues and made submission in the order that observations made at the interlocutory stage of hearings will not come in way of the trial of the Suit.

  3. 12.10.2011: By reference and relying upon the dismissal orders in NMS 2514 & 3514 of Justice R.Y. Ganoo, Justice Kathawala also dismissed my remaining notice of motions also and has denied interim reliefs to me. Although I have been appearing in person since he year of 2007, Hon’ble Justice SJ Kathawala insisted on taking a Court appointed and withdraw two of my notice of motions putting my name for the same in order.

  1. The Maritime union of India has also filed a affidavits dated 24.7.2008, 08.01.2008 & 16.8.2011 highlighting breach of agreement of employment and contempt by the Defendant and supporting and agreeing to all submissions of the Plaintiff. At present there is no impediment for the Hon’ble Court to make all my applicable prayers in suit and notice of motions absolute / pass preliminary decree in my favor.

Plaintiff in Person

Yüklə 26,44 Kb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:

Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur © 2023
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə