Iranagouda S/O Basagouda Satigoudar ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 December, 2012

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Iranagouda S/O Basagouda Satigoudar ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 December, 2012

Bench: H.N.Nagamohan Das

                            :1:




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
             CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

          Dated this the 11th day of December, 2012

                           Before

      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS

             WP No. 13841 OF 2006[CS-RES]
BETWEEN

1.   IRANAGOUDA
     S/O BASAGOUDA SATIGOUDAR (MILTRY)
     AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS OCC: DIRECTOR
     KRISHNA SUGAR FACTORY
     R/O. SHEGUNASHI, TALUK ATHANI
     DIST BELGAUM.

2.   MALAGOUD S/O BABAGOUD PATIL
     AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
     OCC: DIRECTOR,KRISHNA SUGAR FACTORY
     R/O. SANKRATTI,
     TALUK ATHANI
     DIST BELGUAM

3.   SIDDAPPA
     S/O. APPANNA MUDAKANNAVAR,
     AGED 47 YEARS, OCC: DIRECTOR
     KRISHNA SUGAR FACTORY
     R/O. KOKATNUR, TALUK ATHANI
     DIST BELGUAM
                                               ... PETITIONERS
                              :2:




(By Sri: SRINIVAS PATTAVARDHAN, ADV. FOR SHANTESH
GUREDDI, ADV. )

AND

1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
      REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
      DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION
      M.S. BUILDING
      DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
      BANGALORE -560 001

2.    THE KRISHNA SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT
      AT ATHANI,
      TALUK ATHANI
      DIST BELGUAM
      REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

3.    THE TRIVENI ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIES LIMITED
      8TH FLOOR, EXPRESS TRADE TOWERS
      15-16TH SECTOR, 16-A, NOIDA - 201301
      UTTAR PRADESH STATE.
                                           ... RESPONDENTS

(By Smt : K.VIDYAVATHI, AGA FOR R1
    SRI : SACHIN S.MAGDUM, ADV. FOR R2
    SRI : SHANKAR HEGADE ASSTS. FOR R3)


THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION
OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DT. 16.12.2003 VIDE
ANNEXURE B AND ORDER DT. 1.3.2004 VIDE ANNEXURE B1
PASSED BY THE R1 STATE.

This petition coming on for preliminary hearing 'B' group this
day, the court made the following:
                                :3:




                             ORDER

Petitioners are the Directors of second respondent society. The second respondent society entrusted certain works to the third respondent under a deed of agreement dated 19.10.2000 as per Annexure-A. On the question of payment of certain money there came to be a dispute between second respondent and the third respondent. In the circumstances, the third respondent approached first respondent-Government by giving representations. On the basis of these representations a notice was issued to the second respondent. Now under the impugned orders at Annexures-B and B1 dated 16.12.2003 and 1.3.2004 respectively the Government directed the second respondent to pay certain money to the third respondent. Petitioners being the Directors of the second respondent are before this court.

2. As per Clause-19 of the agreement if there is any difference between the parties, then they have to work out their :4: remedy by approaching an Arbitrator. Therefore, the impugned orders passed by the first respondent Government is without jurisdiction. On this ground alone the impugned orders are liable to be set-aside. Accordingly, the following:

ORDER

i) Petition is hereby allowed.

ii) The impugned orders at Annexures-B and B1 passed by the first respondent are hereby quashed.

iii) However, the third respondent is at liberty to proceed against the second respondent for recovery of money in accordance with the terms of the agreement - Annexure A.

iv) Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE Dkb

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court