GLOBE GROUND INDIA EMPLOYEES UNION versus LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES & ANR.

Citation: [2019] 6 S.C.R. 641 · Decided: 23-04-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R. BANUMATHI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
641
GLOBE GROUND INDIA EMPLOYEES UNION
v.
LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES & ANR.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 4076-4077 of 2019)
APRIL 23, 2019
[R. BANUMATHI AND R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.]
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947– ss.10(4) and 25-F, 25-G, 25-
O, 25-N – Information furnished by the first respondent (holding
company of the second respondent-employer of the appellant-
workers’ union) that they would stop ground handling services from
the International Airlines at Delhi – Workers of the appellant-union
were issued termination notices– Dispute referred by the Central
Government to the Industrial Tribunal – Before the Tribunal, the
appellant inter alia alleged that second respondent is a joint venture
formed by Globe Ground Deutschland GmbH and one Bird Group,
which floated a new company that has undertaken ground handling/
ancillary services to international airlines and was utilising the same
equipment belonging to the second respondent and in the said
company most of the employees were retained except the trade union
activists – Though, no relief was claimed against the first respondent,
the appellant sought its impleadment in the industrial dispute
proceedings on the ground that it is the holding company of the
second respondent and hence a proper and necessary party–
Allowed by the Tribunal – Single Judge set aside the order –
Appellant filed intra court appeal – Dismissed – Review – Dismissed
– Held: Reference to be answered by the Tribunal was that, whether
the action of the management of second respondent in closing down
their establishment on 15.12.2009 and retrenching the services of
106 workmen was justified and legal – Whenever, the appropriate
Government refers the points of dispute for adjudication, the Labour
Court/the Tribunal/the National Tribunal, as the case may be, shall
confine its adjudication to those points only and matters incidential
thereto – Necessary party, is one without  whom no order can be
made effectively – Proper party is one in whose absence an effective
order can be made but whose presence is necessary for complete
and final decision on the question involved in the proceedings –
   [2019] 6 S.C.R. 641
641
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
642
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 6 S.C.R.
Even in a subsidiary company which is an independent corporate
entity, if any other company is holding shares, by itself is no ground
to order impleadment of parent company per se – In the present
case, the second respondent itself is a company in which the
subsidiary of the first respondent, Globe Ground Deutschland
GmbH, was holding 51% shares and 49% shares were held by the
Bird Group – Further, having regard to the limited scope of
adjudication to answer the reference, circumscribed by s.10(4) of
the 1947 Act, the first respondent is neither necessary nor proper
party, to answer the reference by the Industrial Court – No error in
the order passed by the Single Judge or the Division Bench – Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or.1, r.10 – Doctrine of Piercing Veil.
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or.1, r.10 – Impleadment of
third party, not a party to the reference under the 1947 Act – Held:
For deciding such application for impleadment what is required to
be considered is whether such party is necessary or proper party to
decide the lis – It all depends on the facts of each case; the
allegations made and the nature of adjudication proceedings etc. –
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Words & Phrases – “Necessary Party” and “Proper Party” –
Meaning of – Explained.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The reference which was required to be
answered by the Industrial Tribunal was that, whether the action
of the Management of M/s Globe Ground India (Pvt.) Limited, in
closing down their establishment on 15.12.2009 and retrenching
the services of 106 workmen was justified and legal. It is clear
from Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 that
whenever, the appropriate Government refers the points of
dispute for adjudication, the Labour Court or the Tribunal or the
National Tribunal, as the case may be, shall confine its adjudication
to those points only and matters incidential thereto. Whenever,
an application is filed in the adjudication proceedings, either before
the Industrial Tribunal in a reference made under the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 or any other legal proceedings, for
impleadment of a party who is not a party to the proceedings,
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
643
what is required to be considered is whether such party wh

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.