Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Fiji

Naidu v Rarawai & Penang Cane Producers Association [2015] FJHC 338; HBC72.2015 (8 May 2015)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
[WESTERN DIVISION] AT LAUTOKA
CIVIL JURISDICTION

CIVIL ACTION NO: HBC72 OF 2015

BETWEEN:

VINOD NAIDU of Vaqia, Ba.
FIRST PLAINTIFF

HYDRA BEGGof Waimari, Rakiraki.
SECOND PLAINTIFF

ANWAR ALI ofWaimari, Rakiraki
THIRD PLAINTIFF

MOHAMMED AFZAL KHAN of Drumasi, Tavua
FOURTH PLAINTIFF

MALKIT SINGH of Vaqia, Ba
FIFTH PLAINTIFF

SAT DEO of Balevuto, Ba
SIXTH PLAINTIFF

YOGENDRA KANT of Natawa, Tavua
SEVENTH PLAINTIFF

ANANDI LAL of Madhuvani, Rakiraki
EIGHTH PLAINTIFF

GAJRAJ SINGH of Banisogosogo, Rakiraki
NINTH PLAINTIFF

PRAMOD KUMAR of Lausa, Tavua
TENTH PLAINTIFF

AND:

RARAWAI & PENANG CANE PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION
having its registered office at the First Floor, Sunbeam Building, Main Street, Ba.
DEFENDANT

Before: Hon. Mr. Justice S. S. Sapuvida
Counsels: Mr. AmanRavindra Singh for Plaintiff
Mr. Padarath and Mr. Dayal for Defendants

Date of hearing: 07 May 2015
Date of Ruling: 08 May 2015

RULING ON PRELIMINARY OBJECTION

1. Plaintiff filed Ex-Parte Notice of Motion dated 4/5/2015 pursuant to Order 29 Rule 1 of the High Court Rules (HCR), and the inherent jurisdiction of High Court.

2. On 6/5/2015 the Counsel for the Plaintiff supported the motion Ex-Parte.

3. Having heard the Counsel, Court converted the Ex-Parte Motion into Inter-Parte's Notice of Motion.

4. Notice issued to the Defendant on 7/5/2015.

5. On 7/5/2015 Defendant appeared represented by a Counsel.

6. Defendant took up an objection in a preliminary objection, under Order 29, Rule (1) of the HCR.

7. Court fixed the Matter for an Order in view of the Preliminary Objection on 8/5/2015.

8. The nature of the relief sought for by the Plaintiff:

(a) to restrain the Defendant from preventing the ten (10) Board Members from resuming their duties as members Of the Rarawai and Penang Cane Producers Association Board.

(b) That the Defendant and or through their servants or Agents be restrained from proceeding in with the Extra-Ordinary General Meeting of the members of the RPCPA scheduled for16 May 2015.

(c) That the Defendant and through its servants or agents be restrained forthwith from proceeding in any manner whatsoever with the Extra-Ordinary General Meeting of the members of the RPCPA advertised to be held on Saturday16th May 2015 at Kshatriya Hall, Varadoli, Ba.

9. The attention of the Court made to the Order 29 of the HCR.

10. The Order 29, Rule 1, 2, 3:

(1) "An Application for the grant for an injunction may be made by any party or matter before or after the trial of the cause or matter, whether or not a claim for the injunction was included in the party's writ, originating summons, counter claim of third party notice, as the case may be.

(2) Where the applicant is the Plaintiff and the case is one of urgency and the delay caused by proceeding in the ordinary way would entail irreparable or serious mischief such application may be made Ex-Parte on Affidavit but except aforesaid such application must be made by Notice of Motion or Summons.

(3) The Plaintiff may not make such an application before the issue of the writ or originating summons by which the cause or matter is to be begun except where the case is one of urgency, and in that case the injunction applied for may be granted on terms providing for the issue of the Writ or Summons and such other terms, if any, as the Court thinks fit.

11. The Plaintiff in the present application for injunction, also filed an Affidavit in Support of Vinod Naidu, of Vaqia Settlement, Ba, a farmer.

12. Plaintiff also submitted the annexure "VN.1" to 'VN5" along with the present application for injunctions.

13. This Court, having considered the nature of the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff, and also the Order 29, Rule 3, that the case is one of urgency, and the damages would not be a remedy for the Plaintiff at the end, make the following Orders:

(i) The interim injunction is issued against the Defendant, for a limited period of 14 days from today as prayed for in the Notice of Motion under (a) (b) and (c) above.

(ii) The Plaintiff shall file the Summons within 7 days from today.

(iii) The Defendant to be served with the Summons so filed.

(iv) The case to be mentioned on 22 May 2015 for Objections by the Defendant.

(v) The Hearing date to be fixed on the injunctions application on the next mention date.

The Case to be mentioned on 22/5/2015 for Objections by the Defendant.

S. S. Sapuvida
Judge

At Lautoka
08th May, 2015