Karnataka High Court
M/S Pushpam Realty vs Dega Devakumar Reddy on 31 July, 2024
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30198
WP No. 20089 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 20089 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
M/S PUSHPAM REALTY
A REGISTERED FIRM
NO.191, 1ST CROSS, 1ST BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR EAST, BYRASANDRA,
BENGALURU-561203
REPRESENTED BY ABHIRAM M
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. DHANANJAY JOSHI., SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI. ANISH ACHARYA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by JUANITA DEGA DEVAKUMAR REDDY
THEJESWINI
S/O LATE DEGA RAMGOPAL REDDY,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
KARNATAKA RESIDING AT, VILLA NO.33,
COOK STREET, 10 DOWNING, WHITEFIELD, HOSKOTE
ROAD, KANNAMANGALA, BIDDARANAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU - 560 067,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADGI., SR. COUNSEL FOR
SMT. ANJANA C.H., ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30198
WP No. 20089 of 2024
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DTD. 10.07.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED TRIAL JUDGE IN
EX.PET.NO. 1075/2020 IN SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO ANNX-A
AND DIRECTION TO CONSIDER THE INTERLOCUTORY
APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 05.12.2023
UNDER SECTION 47 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE 1908 AT
ANNX-F AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner, a developer who had entered into an agreement of development with the respondent is before this court aggrieved of the impugned order at Annexure-A passed by the Executing Court, directing the petitioner herein to deposit the original documents belonging to the respondent herein, for inspection in order to adjudicate the matter and it was directed that it would be better to keep the documents in the court custody.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:30198 WP No. 20089 of 2024
2. The brief facts that being the parties before this court is that when the respondent went before the Arbitral Tribunal seeking adjudication of the disputes between the parties arising of the agreement that was entered into between the parties at an undisputed point of time. It appears that a compromise petition was filed by the parties and the Arbitral Tribunal passed an order on 22.09.2018 in AC No.44/2018 on the basis of the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the parties and respective learned advocates, wherein it was recorded that the parties are present before the Tribunal and they are identified by their respective learned advocates. It was recorded that the parties have stated that they have entered into the settlement on their own volition and without any duress from anybody. The Tribunal finds that the settlement arrived at is fair and proper and therefore, the arbitration case was disposed of in terms of the memorandum of compromise extracted into the said order.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:30198 WP No. 20089 of 2024
3. It appears that the respondent thereafter filed a execution case on 15.06.2020 with various prayers including a direction to the judgment debtor to return the original documents in respect of the immoveable properties mentioned in the schedule. Thereafter, on an application filed at the hands of the decree holder under Order XI Rule 14 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, the Executing Court has proceeded to pass the impugned order.
4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks to contend that the execution case was filed even before the award could be passed by the Arbitral Tribunal. Moreover, it was pointed out from the memorandum of settlement that the respondent, owner of the property was required to execute a General Power of Attorney in favour of the developer which would then enable the developer to proceed to develop the property in terms of the compromise petition. It is contended that the respondent never executed General Power of Attorney -5- NC: 2024:KHC:30198 WP No. 20089 of 2024 and therefore the respondent could not have approached the Executing Court seeking execution of the award.
5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent however has taken this court through the order sheet maintained by the Arbitral Tribunal and has submitted that the Arbitral Tribunal disposed of the arbitration case on 22.09.2018 in terms of the memorandum of settlement filed by the parties. However, subsequently the respondent wanted the award to be registered in the office of jurisdictional Sub-Registrar. However, it was informed to the respondent that the award was not in the format prescribed and therefore it was not possible for the registering authority to register such a document. It is thereafter that the parties once again went before the Arbitral Tribunal and subsequently an order and award was passed on 14.12.2021. The learned Senior Counsel would therefore submit that there is no substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that execution case was filed even before -6- NC: 2024:KHC:30198 WP No. 20089 of 2024 the award was passed by the Arbitral Tribunal. Learned Senior Counsel would also add on instructions that respondent has executed a Power of Attorney as required in terms of memorandum of settlement.
6. Having heard the learned Senior Counsels on both the sides and on perusing the petition papers, this court is of the considered opinion that the question as to whether Power of Attorney was executed in terms of the memorandum of settlement and in terms of the award is something which has to be considered by the Executing Court. Nevertheless, the impugned order only requires the petitioner to deposit the original title deeds with the Executing Court. It is also noticeable that in the operative portion of the impugned order it has been directed that the original document would be better keep in the custody of the court.
7. In that view of the matter, this court is of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice it would be required that the petitioner should deposit the original -7- NC: 2024:KHC:30198 WP No. 20089 of 2024 title deeds before the Executing Court and the original documents shall remain in the custody of the court till an enquiry is held and orders are passed by the Executing Court subsequently.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the petitioner to deposit the original documents before the executing court and the Executing Court shall receive the same and keep the original documents in its safe custody till the enquiry is held into the matter and orders are passed by the Executing Court, in accordance with law.
Sd/-
(R DEVDAS) JUDGE KLY CT: JL