1. Advocates for the Plaintiffs notice of Notice of Motion

2. Notice of Motion

3. The suit

back to Legal Update / home


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

SUIT NO ________ OF 2001

Dow Chemical International Private Limited ....... Plaintiff

V/s

The National Campaign for the Justice in Bhopal & Ors. ..........Defendants


INDEX

Sr. No. Particulars
1. Proforma
2. Plaint
3. Vakalatnama
4. Memorandum of Registered Address
5. List of Documents
6. Exhibit-A - Copy of Memorandum of Demands dated February 28, 2001
7. Exhibit B - Translated copy of FIR dated February 28, 2001
8. Exhibit B-1 - Photocopy of the FIR dated February 28, 2001
9. Exhibit C - Particulars of Claim

 


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

SUIT NO. ________ OF 2001

 

DOW CHEMICAL INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. )

a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, )

1956, having its office at Unit No.1, Corporate Park )

V N Purav Marg, Chembur, BOMBAY 400 07 )            ...... Plaintiff

Versus

1. The National Campaign for Justice in Bhopal )

Having its office at A-54.3, Housing Board Colony )

Aishbag, )

BHOPAL 462 001 )

2. Nirashrit Pension Bhogi Sanghat-sh Morcha, )

Bhopal )

3. Bhopal Gas Peedith Mahila Stationery )

Karmachari Sangh )

4. Bhopal Group for Information & Action )

5. Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti )

6. Maharashtra Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti )

7. Indian Federation of Trade Unions )

8. Nari Atyachar Virodhi Manch    )

9. Sarva Mazdoor Sarigh    )

10. Vinod Shetty, Vice President, Maharashtra Kamgar Sami    )

11.   Pravin Anant Ghag, Jt. Secretary, Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti    )

12. Shri Anthony Sami, Lokshahi Hakk Sanghatana    )

13. Smt. Rashidabi, Gas affected Mahila, Karmachari Sanghatana, Bhopal   )

14. Smt. Champa Devi Shukla, Gas Peedit Mahila, Karm Sangh, Bhopal    )

15. Siddharth Yogendra Prasad Roy - Recordist    )

16. Neeraj Mohan Sahay - Cameraman    )

17. Ganesh Nichore - Narmada Bachao  )         ...........Defendants


The Plaintiff abovenamed states as follows:

1. The Plaintiff is a company incorporated tinder the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at the address mentioned in the cause title.

2. The Defendants are the various associations/ unions of persons who are represented by the defendant No. 1 who has stated to be their representatives. The Plaintiff is unaware of the constitutions/ structure of the Defendants or their office bearers.

3. The Plaintiff states that a company incorporated in the United States of America called Union Carbide Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "UCC") had established a company in India called Union Carbide (India) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "UCIL") to manufacture pesticides at Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. The said UCC held 50.99% of shares of UCIL and the factory was established on the land leased to UCIL by the State of Madhya Pradesh. Some time during December, 1984 there was a leakage of poisonous gas from UCIL plant at Bhopal causing loss of life and a public outcry. A series litigation was commenced on behalf of the victims and after negotiations between the parties a settlement was arrived at as a result of which it was agreed that UCC and/or UCIL would pay in full and final settlement of the said claims a sum of US$470 millions. The Plaintiff understands that the said amount was duly paid by UCC and/UCIL. The said settlement was recorded by two separate orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 14th February, 1989 and 15th February, 1989 and by an order dated 4th May, 1989 the Hon'ble Supreme Court recorded its reasons as to why it had approved the said settlement. The Plaintiff craves leave to refer to and reply upon the said orders when produced.

4. The Plaintiff states that the validity of the said settlement orders was challenged but was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 4th October, 1991 with one modification namely, that it was clarified that the terms of settlement granting immunity from criminal proceedings against UCC and UCIL and/or the officers and agreeing to quash them was set aside. The Plaintiff craves leave to refer to and rely upon the said order dated 4th October, 1991 when produced.

5. The Dow Chemical Company, a Corporation of the State of Delaware of the United States of America having its office at 2020, Dow, Centre, Midland, Michigan 48674, United States of America some time in February, 2001 merged with the said UCC.

6. It may not be inappropriate to state herein that UCC has already divested its 50.99% shareholding in UCIL to McLeod Russell Ltd., vide Agreement dated glh September, 1994. Thus, since 1994, UCC has no stake in UCIL. The Plaintiff craves leave to refer to and rely upon the said Agreement dated glh September, 1994 when produced.

7. The Plaintiff herein is the wholly owned subsidiary of Dow Chemical (India) Holding Pvt. Ltd. It may be stated that The Dow Chemical Company, USA which has merged with UCC holds no shares in the capital of Plaintiff.

8. The Plaintiff states that in the circumstances aforesaid, the Plaintiff is in no way responsible and/or liable of any alleged loss/damage that may have been caused to the people of Bhopal due to leakage of poisonous gas from UCIL's Plant in December, 1984. In any event and without prejudice to what is stated hereinabove, vide the said Settlement Order of the Supreme Court dated 14th /15th February, 1989 UCC and/or UCIL have paid US$470 Millions to the victims of Bhopal Gas disaster and the said settlement order very specifically provides that all civil proceedings related to and arising out of Bhopal Gas disaster shall hereby stand transferred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and shall stand concluded in terms of the settlement.

9. The Plaintiff states that to the Plaintiffs shock and dismay on 28th February, 2001 a group of about 100 people represented by Defendant No. 1 herein mobbed the office of the Plaintiff situated at Unit No.1, Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and shouted slogans, used abusive language and demanded that they meet the Managing Director of the Plaintiff to submit their memorandum/charter of demands. The said protesters/ group threw colours on the office premises, employees' cars and damaged the Plaintiff's name plate outside the office premises. All the employees' cars parked outside the office of the Plaintiff were defaced with red paint so were the walls and glass paneling of the office building of the Plaintiff. The said group represented by Defendants herein soiled even the telephone and water cooler. The said mob representing Defendants damaged the whole premises and the walls of the Plaintiff's office were splashed with red colour and writing (in Hindi) "Quit India" and "Justice for Bhopal Gas Leak Victims". The Plaintiff states that Plaintiff's employees were totally panicked and the life of the Plaintiff's employees were put in danger. The Plaintiff states that the said protest/ agitation carried out by the Defendants in the manner aforesaid is totally wrong, illegal, malafide and is done with the intention to extract monies out of the Plaintiff who is in no way concerned or connected either with UCC and/or UCIL.

10. The Plaintiff states that since the situation was totally out of control, the Plaintiff called the Police but the Defendants refused to disperse and continued with the agitation and cornered and forced the Plaintiff to invite the representative of the Defendants, Mr. Vinod Shetty, the Defendant No.10 herein and accept the memorandum/ charter of demands from the Defendants for and on behalf of The Dow Chemical Company, USA.. Annexed hereto and marked Exhibit "A" is the copy of the said demands/memorandum presented to the Plaintiff during the said protest. The Plaintiff states that a FIR with the Police in respect of the aforesaid event has been lodged by the Plaintiff, a translated copy of which is annexed hereto and marked Exhibit "B". Hereto annexed and marked Exhibit "B-1" is a photocopy of the said FIR.

11. The Plaintiff states that the Plaintiff is in no way concerned and/or connected either with UCC and/or UCIL and is not responsible and/or liable for the leakage of gas from UCIL's Plant. Further, The Dow Chemical Company, USA with whom UCC has merged holds no share in the capital of the Plaintiff. Thus the Plaintiff is in no way responsible and/or liable for even accepting any charter of demands/memorandum on behalf of The Dow Chemicals Company. The Plaintiff was wrongly and illegally with all possible threats forced to accept the said memorandum on behalf of The Dow Chemical Company by the Defendants.

12. The Plaintiff states that by the said act of the Defendants which mobbed the Plaintiff's office great harm, loss and damage has been caused to the Plaintiff. Under the aforesaid circumstances the Plaintiff submits that the Plaintiff is entitled to claim general and special damages from the Defendants for all the aforesaid acts. The Plaintiff estimates its value for damages at Rs. 77,000/- and Defendants are liable for the same in accordance with the particulars of claims set out in Exhibit "C".

13. The Plaintiff apprehends that in the light of the Defendants' malicious and illegal action as stated hereinabove, the Defendants would once again, in order to wrongly and illegally pressurise the Plaintiff (and as very specifically stated in their demands letter (Exhibit A hereto), inter alia, to the effect that if the Defendants do not hear from The Dow Chemical Company in the next two weeks, the Defendants will take to mean that they need to knock harder) attack, mob, harm and/or cause injury to the Plaintiff's premises and/or its employees.

14. In the circumstances aforesaid, the Plaintiff states that the Plaintiff is entitled for an order of permanent injunction restraining the Defendants and all the groups which are represented by the Defendants from in any manner mobbing/ attacking/ picketing and/or holding any demonstration outside the Plaintiff's office and in no event within the radius of 100 mts. from the Plaintiff's premises situated at Unit No.l, Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and / or situated at Pirojsha Nagar, Godrej Soap Complex, Eastern Express Highway, Vikhroli, Mumbai - 400 079. The plaintiff is also in use and occupation of other premises being premises at Sakhi House Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071, a Warehouse situated at Paras Complex, Mumbai Goa Road, Near Palaspa Phata, Taluka, Panvel, Dist Raigad, and a residence premises situated at 81, Apsara, Bhojwani Enclave Nargis Dutt Road, Pali Hill Bandra (West) Bombay 400 050. The Plaintiff say that they are also entitled to a similar order of Injunction from this Hon'ble Court in respect of the said premises.

15. The Plaintiff further states and submits that pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the Defendants and all the group represented by the Defendants be restrained by an interim order and injunction of this Hon'ble Court from mobbing/ picketing and/or attacking and/or damaging and/or holding demonstration etc., outside the office premises of the Plaintiff situated at Unit No.1, Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and / or situated at Pirojsha Nagar, Godrej Soap Complex, Eastern Express Highway, Vikhroli, Mumbai - 400 079 premises at Sakhi House Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071, and premises at Paras Complex, Mumbai Goa Road, Near Palaspa Phata, Taluka, Panvel, Dist Raigad, and a residence premises situated at 81, Apsara, Bhojwani Enclave Nargis Dutt Road, Pali Hill Bandra (West) Bombay 400 050, and in no event within the radius of 100 Mts. from the Plaintiff's premises situated at Unit No.1, Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and / or situated at Pirojsha Nagar, Godrej Soap Complex, Eastern Express Highway, Vikhroli, Mumbai - 400 079 premises at Sakhi House Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and premises at Paras Complex, Mumbai Goa Road, Near Palaspa Phata, Taluka, Panvel, Dist Raigad, and a residence premises situated at 81, Apsara, Bhojwani Enclave Nargis Dutt Road, Pali Hill Bandra (West) Bombay 400 050.

16. The Plaintiffs say that the activities of the Defendants mobbing / holding demonstration/ damaging of the property etc. outside the Office of the Plaintiffs and their car of the employees of the Plaintiff and other property, in the manner stated in the above paragraphs, has caused apprehensions in the mind of employees, staff, officer and visitors of the Plaintiffs. Therefore, the Plaintiffs prays that the Defedants should be restrained by an order of injunction of this Hon'ble Court from in any manner obstructing, blocking and/or harassing or preventing the free ingress and egress of the employees/ and /or visitors of the Plaintiffs, to the office premises and the said premises of the Plaintiffs.

17. The Plaintiffs say that the losses occasions to the Plaintiffs at their office in Bombay. The Defendants are threatening to interfere with the Plaintiffs business / operations at Bombay, the Defendants however are at Bhopal. The reliefs of injunction sought against the Defendants is in personem. The material part of cause of action has arisen in Bombay. Therefore, leave may be granted to the Plaintiffs under clause XII of Letters Patent to file the suit in this Hon'ble Court. The Plaintiff therefore states that upon this Hon'ble Court granting leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent, this Hon'ble Court will have jurisdiction to entertain, try and dispose off this suit.

18. The Plaintiffs say and submits that the Defendants No.1 to 9 appears to be association of persons / union. The Plaintiffs is unaware of the constitution as to whether the Defendants are registered or unregistered. However, it appears that the Defendants are unregistered bodies. The Defendant No.10 has represented himself to be the representative of the Defendants No. 1 to 9, whilst Defendants No. 1 1 to 17 have accompanied him as the other members / officer bearers of Defendant No.1 to 9. The Plaintiff is unaware of name of office bearer of the Defendants No.1 to 9. In the circumstances the Plaintiffs is presenting the present suit under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, suing the Defendants No.1 to 9 and their members through Defendants No.10 to 17 in their representative capacity.

19. The Plaintiff submits that unless the reliefs prayed for herein are granted to the Plaintiff grave and irreparable harm, loss and injury would be caused to the Plaintiff. The balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiff.

20. The Plaintiff values the suit claim of Rs. 77,000/- in accordance with the particulars of claim set out in Exhibit "C" hereto and have paid the court fees accordingly.

21. The suit is not barred by the statute of limitation.

22. The Plaintiff has its office in Mumbai. The agitation/mobbing by the Defendants was done by the Defendants outside the Plaintiff's office in Mumbai. The FIR has been lodged at the Chembur Police Station at Mumbai. Thus the entire cause of action has arisen in Mumbai and this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction to try, entertain and dispose of this Suit.

23. Ravi Muthukrishnan who is the Managing Director of the Plaintiff and who is aware of the facts and circumstances of the case and who is able to depose of the same has signed and verified the present Plaint.

24. The Plaintiff will rely on documents, a list whereof is annexed hereto.


The Plaintiff therefore prays:

a) For a decree directing the Defendants to pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs. 77,000/- (Rupees Seventy seven thousand only) with interest at the rate of 21% from the date of filing of the suit till the date of payment as per the details submitted in Exhibit "C" annexed hereto;

b) For permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from mobbing/picketing and/or attacking and/or damaging and/or holding demonstration etc., outside the office premises of the Plaintiff situated at Unit No.1, Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and / or situated at Piroisha Nagar, Godrej Soap Complex, Eastern Express Highway, Vikhroli, Mumbai - 400 079 and / or premises at Sakhi House Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and/or premises situated at Paras Complex, Mumbai Goa Road, Near Palaspa Phata, Taluka, Panvel, Dist Raigad, and/or premises situated at 81, Apsara, Bhojwani Enclave Nargis Dutt Road, Pali Hill Bandra (West) Bombay 400 050 and in no event within the radius of 100 Mts. from the Plaintiff's premises situated at Unit No.1, Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and / or premises at Sakhi House Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and/or situated at Piroisha Nagar, Godrej Soap Complex, Eastern Express Highway, Vikhroli, Mumbal - 400 079 and/or premises at Paras Complex, Mumbal Goa Road, Near Palaspa Phata, Taluka, Panvel, Dist Raigad, and/or premises situated at 81, Apsara, Bhojwani Enclave Nargis Dutt Road, Pali Hill Bandra (West) Bombay 400 050;

C) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the above suit, Defendants be restrained by order and injunction from mobbing/picketing and/or attacking and/or damaging and/or holding demonstration etc., outside the office premises of the Plaintiff situated at Unit No.1, Corporate Park, V N PLirav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and or premises at Sakhi House Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and/or situated at Pirojsha Nagar, Godrej Soap Complex, Eastern Express Highway, Vikhroli, Mumbai - 400 079 and/or premises at Paras Complex, Mumbai Goa Road, Near Palaspa Phata, Taluka, Panvel, Dist Raigad, and/or premises situated at 81, Apsara, Bhojwani Enclave Nargis Dutt Road, Pali Hill Bandra (West) Bombay 400 050 and in no event within the radius of 100 Mts. from the Plaintiff's premises situated at Unit No.1, Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and / or premises at Sakhi House Corporate Park, V N Purav Marg, Chembur, Bombay 400 071 and/or situated at Pirojsha Nagar, Godrej Soap Complex, Eastern Express Highway, Vikhroli, Mumbai - 400 079 and/or premises at Paras Complex, Mumbai Goa Road, Near Palaspa Phata, Taluka, Panvel, Dist Raigad, and/or premises situated at 81, Apsara, Bhojwani Enclave Nargis Duft Road, Pali Hill Bandra (Westi, Bombay 400 050;

d) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the above suit for an order directing the Defendants to give free ingress and egress to all the employees, staff, officers and/or visitors of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and/or its employees, staff, officers and/or visitors be not harassed in any manner whatever;

e) Interim and ad-interim reliefs in terms of prayers (c) to (d) above;

f) For cost of this suit; and

g) For such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case my require.

Plaint drawn by:

Shiraz Patodia
Advocate, High Court

and
Settled by:
Pravin Samdhani, Counsel


VERIFICATION

1, Ravi Muthukrishnan of Mumbai, Indian Inhabitant, residing at 81, Apsara, Bhojwani Enclave, Nargis Dutt Road, Pali Hill, Bandra, Mumbai - 400 050 Managing Director of the Plaintiffs abovenamed, do hereby solemnly declare and say that what is stated in the aforesaid paragraphs 1,3 to 13 and 23 Is true to the best of my Knowledge and whatever is stated in paragraphs 2,14 to 22 and 24 is based on information and belief and I believe the same to be true.

Solemnly declared at Mumbai this _________ day of March, 2001

Before me,

(Mustafa Motiwala)
Advocate for the Plaintiff


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

SUIT NO. ________ OF 2001

 

DOW CHEMICAL INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. )

a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, )

1956, having its office at Unit No.1, Corporate Park )

V N Purav Marg, Chembur, BOMBAY 400 07 )            ...... Plaintiff

Versus

1. The National Campaign for Justice in Bhopal )

Having its office at A-54.3, Housing Board Colony )

Aishbag, )

BHOPAL 462 001 )

2. Nirashrit Pension Bhogi Sanghat-sh Morcha, )

Bhopal )

3. Bhopal Gas Peedith Mahila Stationery )

Karmachari Sangh )

4. Bhopal Group for Information & Action )

5. Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti )

6. Maharashtra Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti )

7. Indian Federation of Trade Unions )

8. Nari Atyachar Virodhi Manch    )

9. Sarva Mazdoor Sarigh    )

10. Vinod Shetty, Vice President, Maharashtra Kamgar Sami    )

11.   Pravin Anant Ghag, Jt. Secretary, Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti    )

12. Shri Anthony Sami, Lokshahi Hakk Sanghatana    )

13. Smt. Rashidabi, Gas affected Mahila, Karmachari Sanghatana, Bhopal   )

14. Smt. Champa Devi Shukla, Gas Peedit Mahila, Karm Sangh, Bhopal    )

15. Siddharth Yogendra Prasad Roy - Recordist    )

16. Neeraj Mohan Sahay - Cameraman    )

17. Ganesh Nichore - Narmada Bachao  )         ...........Defendants

 

To,

The Prothonotary & Senior Master,
High Court,
Mumbai

Sir,

We Dow Chemcial International Private Limited, the Plaintiff abovenamed, do hereby appoint Mr. Mustafa Motiwala, Advocate, High Court, Bombay to act, appear and plead for us in the above matter.

In witness whereof, we have set our hands to this writing.

Dated this _________ day of March, 2001.

Managing Director of the Plaintiff

Accepted:
Mustafa Motiwala
Advocate for the Plaintiff
C/o Dua Associates
Nirmal, 19th Floor
Mariman Point, Mumbai - 400 021
High Court (O.S) Registration No. 5710


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

SUIT NO ________ OF 2001

Dow Chemical International Private Limited ....... Plaintiff

V/s

The National Campaign for the Justice in Bhopal & Ors. ..........Defendants

Memorandum of Registered Address of the Plaintiff

Dow Chemcial Private Limited

C/o Mustafa S. Motiwala
Advocate for the Plaintiff
C/o Dua Associates
Nirmal, 19th Floor
Nariman Point
Mumbai - 400 021.

(Mustafa Motiwala)
Advocate for the Plaintiff


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

SUIT NO ________ OF 2001

 

Dow Chemical International Private Limited ....... Plaintiff

V/s

The National Campaign for the Justice in Bhopal & Ors. ..........Defendants

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS RELIED ON WHICH THE PLAINTIFF WILL RELY:

1 . Copy of the Memorandum of Demands dated February 28, 2001

2. Copy of FiR dated February 28, 2001 filed at ChembLir Police Station

3. Supreme Court Judgements of dated 14 February, 1989 and 15th February 1989 recording settlements between victims of Bhopal gas tragedy and Union Carbide

4. Copy of the order of the Supreme Court dated 4 Ih May 1989 recording the reasons for approving the settlement between victims of Bhopal gas tragedy and Union Carbide

5. Supreme Court order dated 4th October 1999 holding the validity of the order dated 4th May 1989.

(Mustafa Motiwala)
Advocate for the Plaintiff

28-02-2001


Exhibit - A: Memorandum of Defendants' demands


Exhibit - B: FIR
Exhibit - B1: Marathi statement (handwritten)

STATEMENT

Cyrus Homi Tainawalia, Parsi, age 40 profession Service, Manager HRD, address C 204 Suresh Smruti, Prathamesh Complex, Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai - 52. Tel. 620 3136, Office 524 5830.

1 am as stated above and reside at the above address with my family.

I work as Manager with Dow Chemical International P. Ltd., Corporate Park, Unit No.1, V.N. Purav Marg, Chembur - 71. My working hours are 9.00 am to 6.00 pm. My office has holiday on Saturday and Sunday.

The head office of Dow Chemicals International P. Ltd. is in USA. Their branches are spread in many counties all over the world.

Union Carbide is also an American company having its head office in USA and branches in many countries all over the world. The said Company had a branch in Bhopal. The Company sold off its Bhopal branch to McLead Russell.

Our Company purchased all the branches / companies of Union Carbide, except the Indian Company in February 2001.

Today on 28.2.2001, 1 left home for office at 8.1 0 am and when I had reached the junction at Suman Nagar on Sion-Trombay Road, I received a call on my mobile phone from my office saying that some people affected by Bhopal gas leakage had gathered outside the office. So I came to the police station at Chembur and then went to my office alongwith policemen. When 1 reached my office I saw that about 40 to 50 women and 20 to 25 men had gathered in the courtyard of the office and were shouting slogans. They had with them red plastic bags filled with red colour which they had smeared on all the glasses, front doors and walls, they had also put this red colour on the security guard and on the telephone in his cabin and they were shouting 'Quit India', 'Give justice to Bhopal gas affected'. Among the people who gathered in front of my office, people named below were also present.

1 Vinod Shetty, Vice President, Maharashtra Kamgar Samiti

2.     Pravin Anant Ghag, Jt. Secretary, Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti

3 Shri Anthony Swami, Lokshahi Hakk Sanghatana

4 Smt. Rashidabi, Gas affected Mahila, Karmachari Sanghatana, Bhopal

5 Smt. Champa Devi Shukla, Gas Peedit Mahila, Karm Sangh, Bhopal

6 Siddharth Yogendra Prasad Roy, Recordist

7 Neeraj Mohan Sahay, Cameraman

8 Ganesh Nichore, Narmada Bachao

Alongwith the above mentioned persons, about 20 to 22 men and 35 to 40 women were present in front of the Company office. These above mentioned persons gathered these people illegally for their own purposes making them party to illegal acts and smeared paint on the entrance, and front side of the walls, glass and the rear walls etc. Hence, I request appropriate action against these persons.

My statement was recorded in Marathi and it was explained to me.

Sd/- (C.H. Jalnawalla)

In the presence of

Sub Inspector
Chernbur Police Station

Details of suspects:

(1) Vinod Shetty, (2) Pravin Anant Ghag, (3) Anthony Swami, (4) Smt. Rashidabi, (5) Smt. Champa Devi Shukla, (6) Siddharth Yogesh Prasad Roy, (7) Neeraj Mohan Sahay, (8) Ganesh Nichore

FIR Contents

On the above date and time at the above place, people gathered illegally and made them members illegally to achieve their purpose and smeared paint on the front side, walls and glasses and forced to accept their statement of demands, hence section 103, 149 IPC 377(3) 135


Exhibit - C

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

Cost of cleaning and painting (overcoat) of the colours of the two cars defaced by the Defendants Rs. 40,000/-

Cost of cleaning the glass fagade of the office premises Rs. 2,000/-

Cost of repainting the office security area damaged by the Defendants Rs. 5,000/-

Cost of providing extra security for 2 weeks Rs. 30,000/-

TOTAL Rs. 77,000/-

Interest at the rate of 21% on the said sum of Rs. 77,000/from the date of filing of the suit till payment and realisation thereof.