The Coimbatore District Textile Workers Union v. The Registrar Of Trade Union

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI AND CMP NO. 19990 OF 2025 The Coimbatore District Textile Workers Union (Reg No.111/1938) Rep. by its President T.S. Rajamani, S/o. Subbarayan, having their office at 22/2, Trichy Road, Singanallur, Coimbatore.

..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Registrar Of Trade Union The Joint Commissioner of Labour, Balasundram Road, Coimbatore.

2. K.A. Ashwathaman S/o. Ayyavukonar, Res. at No.26, Raju Naidu Layout, Sugarcane (Post), Veerakeralam, Coimbatore.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER Civil Revision Petition filed under Art. 227 of Constitution of India, praying to allow the CRP and set aside the order dated 20.02.2025 passed in IA No.6 of 2023 in OS No.656 of 2020 on the file of the Principal District Munsif of Coimbatore.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.K.Balasubramaniam For Respondent(s):

Mr.K.V. Muthu Visakan For R2

ORDER

Challenging the impugned order passed in I.A.No.6 of 2023 in O.S.No.656 of 2020 by the learned Principal District Munsif, Coimbatore, the Revision Petitioner/plaintiff preferred this Civil Revision Petition. 2.Before the trial court, the 2nd respondent/third party filed an application under Order I Rule 10 of C.P.C., praying to implead him as 2nd defendant in the suit stating that he was Ex-Branch Secretary of nfhit $py;yh g "

";rhiy bjhHpyhsh;

r';fk;

" and he came to know that the present Secretary, after taking charge, with an intention to swindle the Union's properties by selling the same to his wellwishers, had also enrolled 68 members to the Union with a malafide intention. Inspite of objections that there is a proposal on the side of revision petitioner to start a new union to safeguard the interest of the workers, to curtail the same, he came forward with the present suit. Therefore, to decide the declaratory relief claimed in the said suit, he is also necessary party. Otherwise, behind back, the revision petitioner/plaintiff would act against the interest of the members of the society. Therefore, he wanted to implead himself as necessary party in the suit and the said application was allowed by the trial judge.

Aggrieved over that, the revision petitioner/plaintiff had preferred this Civil Revision Petition. 3.The learned counsel for revision petitioner/plaintiff would submit that already the same set of application was filed by one R.K.Devaraj in I.A.No.3 of 2022 and the same was dismissed by the trial judge. After that, within three months, the 2nd respondent came forward with the same set of application viz.

Ashwathaman, who is no way connected with the present plaintiff union and to cause interference to the administration, he wanted to implead himself as necessary party, so he is an unnecessary party to the proceedings. But, inspite of objections, the trial judge has erroneously allowed the application. Hence, he prayed to set aside the findings of trial court.

4. The learned counsel for 2nd respondent would submit that before the trial court, the 1st respondent viz., the Registrar of Trade Union remained exparte and with an ulterior motive, the revision petitioner/plaintiff wanted to get a declaration relief with an intention to sell the properties belonging to the said workers union worth about more than Rs.100 crores, wherein the workers interest are involved and the present Secretary is acting against the interest of union. Therefore, he wanted to implead him and the same was rightly considered by the trial judge, which needs no interference.

5. Heard and considered rival submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering both side submissions and on perusal of records, the revision petitioner/plaintiff has filed the suit to declare the name in English "The Coimbatore District Textile Workers Union" and the name in Tamil nfhit $py;yh g "

";rhiy bjhHpyhsh; r';fk;

" as one and the same. The reason behind this reveals that as per the sale deed, the property purchased in the year 2008 and the same was purchased on behalf of the said workers union, wherein in the said deed, the name of the said union is mentioned in English as "The

Coimbatore District Textile Workers Union". Now, the revision petitioner/plaintiff wanted to declare the English name of the said union, which would clearly implies that there must be possibility of taking steps to sell the property or to include the property of the said union. Therefore, to safeguard the interest of the members and the interest of workers, the erstwhile Secretary/2nd respondent is also necessary party to the proceedings, which would not cause any prejudice to the revision petitioner/plaintiff concerning with the prayer. Hence, the reasons assigned by the trial judge is sustainable one, which requires no interference. Accordingly, the findings rendered in I.A.No.6 of 2023 in O.S.No.656 of 2020 by the Principal District Munsif, Coimbatore, is confirmed and this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as no merit. No costs. Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed. 23-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order RPP To

1. The Principal District Munsif, Coimbatore.

2. The Registrar Of Trade Union, The Joint Commissioner of Labour, Balasundram Road, Coimbatore.

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

RPP AND CMP NO. 19990 OF 2025 23-03-2026