Indian Oil Corporation Ltd vs Suraksha Hotels Pvt Ltd on 9 March, 2011

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd vs Suraksha Hotels Pvt Ltd on 9 March, 2011

Bench: N.K.Patil, H.G.Ramesh

_ D§\f1s1Q.:gA1, i2ETA1I; SALES MANAG ER

E{'§%',;*x.N:;« E "E33 52886

IEEE TIXE HEGH CQURT OE' §{ARNA.'IE'.£3§.KA A5}? BANGALGRE

3ATED THIS THE 91" DAY OF' MARCH 29$ 1

PRESENT

THE HOFTBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.PATIL-r. _ ' . "  .

ANI)   ~

THE HQNBLE MR, JUSTICE ii,G;ié;Ah§ES1,é :'  4.   TA

R.F.A.No.17s1/2905 (:z[Es)% V    
BETWEEN:  ''

INDIAN on, CORPORAZ1'iONE;'.§7..;&'. _ 3
CORPORATE? OFFICE AT  

INDIAN 011, BHAVAN',AG«9  '
ALEYAVARJUNG :v1:AR.c;v.._ ;_ '     
{BANDRAY EAST} i }i:~= V .    '   
MUMBAL400 051   2 .    .

I3ANGA1,0;::«:":3:v1ASI0N'A;s," 053?: C-1:: AT  '  '
INDIAN OH, BI»1AV;A.N, NQ..29»._   '
P.KA:,1NGA-RAG ROAD," '~ .  _ 
BANGALORE:%2?  ' ' 

:~zE:PR:«:s1a:m'13:1) a1§3'{V_i'1"::-;..§:1ﬂI}f£;F  s

, . .APPEE,LAN'?

QTY :3ré'1.*¥3iK;.$R1:;2-igja, AD'JOCA'E'}E3}

  

 4 3, SUR££'Z.S;§§{z'-X §"i{)'E"ELS {PVET} Lf§.'"}3

  $z~i.E«:f:$_:~»i;x::uR: R0AI:>
.,:3;a:~:<}A§.,<);a&: 560 0:39
" Rf$E'¥€1fZfrEEEZN'{'E§"{L} 21%':-*

.  :';:q¥§=:::':'<}R E§RI.. .{}«S§E§}i"{A§'{AR



R,E'.A.Na. i?'{% E X2606

2. SR} §%'E~I£-"xRf%.,'};' }E3H'€§Si"iA§\§ NE-XRJENEE
E§{}E'«.? €33" E,-ATEZ SR} {EM E3E?;%"s.E{2'%.ES§'i fT'~€2'XE:{Ai.\:'{}
?R€f)PRI§*IE'(}F~'i, NE /55 E-3E3iAEiAEi'»IAf 8%)-RVKTEZ S'l'A'§7i{}?€
§'\§{}.i2;5_g' .1. SE'-EEi8f:"{A§)RI R{}AD
E§£'s.N{}AI.C)RI§-- BEGOOE3 . . .§{.I}ZS?{}NE) E3-}'."~3'E"E§

(337 SEQ? C:.§{R1SPfNAMUE~E'§'E'§Y. A§}'J{)CA'I'EZ FGR {if R1 ,
E~?2;~ SD.)

'§'§~"iI:-3 52.1%, 15:; FILED U,fS 96 0? cps A<;;x1;_~s:é::*  *' 

JUDC}3\/EEEVH' AND DEICREZE IDATEEE {}2.0€3'2€}®6 PA$'E.%;E§*_ "IN

{}.S.NO.:Ti4 £3/QGEEEZ ON '§'E*§¥f; FELEC OF THE JXVAI}i7L;." Ci'i{7';:'_'CI1'i;i{§;' _
QEUDGEL BANGALORE [CCH.NG.3}, E}ECR,.ET;EZE\?(34« ':I'HEi 5:31,?§V'}7«EffQP€-w«'

E«}EZC'§7.MFZNT._ ARRELRRS OF R.EN'I' §:3'§"C.,. 

mig R.F'.A. comma ON .:<*c:._R H.I§;AR1'NG ':'*;£'i,.~§~; v §_;x':",";

N.K,F'A"£'1L aw DELIVEREE) '£'HEZ §'0.:,z.<§}'xA;1zx5<;; " .
JUDGME§g.

T 111:; appeai is 21.fi~sin.g*.%0§1t:,  (':=ff ﬁhs: irnpugnecl
judgment and dec1'e<f; datéd"--i?}*f<' EJ351118  passed in

o:a5413x2o02 m:a§e_ﬁ$farthe XV'AddL Cﬁy cum
Judge, Bang§a1_Q:"eV5  V . ' V
 a.Weif1aveg h"earVd the Eeameé Caunsei for the

8;p.§{§i':1_EﬁEA?"S"'lzlﬁﬁt'V§ﬁ?§.-ilﬁflﬁd Caunsei 'far the re3spc:3:1de11'£s.

 \'»{hé13:i.h€ niatter had €:{}m€: 11;) an 33.2011, after

" ¥;.h*e EI1£ii'.'{',€i'F fer same iimee, ihs: ieamed C::>'E,:msseE

__3¥;';?'§'s&é3;.:'§i1§ Em' bqzih 8:22': §:;;::rﬁs:sa sa{>u_g;*E':é. Eiméé its exgéere {E36

-- §;3<)'3'$:1'ic>iEity mi' Em aznicabie S€;'YJ{.E€iIi€E}3:k Wham €:h€:< rrszsgiierr is



2/
i.

 
,./ %l_,.,«-''''

; .



§~1i.E*',A.N0. E78 £ /2906

Ezikeii: 111:» ':.<)day, {he §e;3;:":"1<.=ci C{m.:}$€:i Em' ﬁght? a.;3pe§E2m:5,
anti itéalifzzed Cémrzgei far {he I'E'S3§.){};{Z1{i€33:1'E$ filed 21:1

.':1ppii{?E1i,E{)§1 made-2' Grder 23 E21116 3 reaci w§t:h S<:;%<:"£',io:2 Z5}

9? CFC, r<3p<3rii11g .s;eti;E<3I11€nt. éiz s3::ibm.i'E',teci i,ha"i. {he ..i'.<::r':ms"'--_

and (?{)I1dii.i€}I1S of the Said appIica.tio1.1 may 13% _p}:3u«::§::d'  "

re<::erd and the i11:~;t2mi. appeai may b_e~€i§.$4p0s::€:d 5:7';  V'

4. The 'tc=:rrr:s and conditions 0 i".ﬁi'§§_T2ifh>pI:iC2111'0:1

under Order 23 Rule 3 read xviihL:' 5e:ci:i0f§ .i_5'1.pVf*.":'€:2ijd
thus:
1.

"Ii: is sub111iti.ed Jt:_1f12.,i' and decree dated 2?'?~13""»Ji;;r1Ve' fxeissed in 1?-"rV1}l:§' me of the XV 14:&"ddii:i0n;a,l §3:.it3fV Bangalore City is undé: appellant has vacated _; 1"h5: shit ..§i:1iedfL:1e property and delivered «avajcaﬁi."p0ss§é:§'£§§i&{2r1 of the sam€ ':0 the firsﬂ:

_ pursuant to the said decree.

H Cmzri has grameti R-s3.58,500,f~ p;.1f1i.'£{S damagea for occupation of the suit égclfedzzie premises {ram 1.6.2003 {€11 delivery NGE' {he vamzarié, p<}$ss€:ss~:ei<>m ihaé. apari, <:r<i€:rimg;; A Rs.?",€}8{}f-- ziawairzis 3.1"'z€:ars; 0%" §"ffi'§€L with i§1'E.€§"€;*..':E'§, 6 pa. zmd E'%s'44,GO0,/~ with 6% pa At": the time. of admi;<sss§<>:1 (ff the :;z§3<>v{~; E€.F'.A.N<}{ E '}'8 i /2806 éip§;}€€1.i., this-5 E--j{.{n2"bIe C<;=u.r'E. W315 pk:2::.s;£:~':{i E0 cérder ih»:=, 2:p§<:%E§am; E0 dr';*.p('JSiE i.h<:=: €:'I1'é.iF£;'. de€::"e<>:i.21}; 21mo'L1:1t:. fX€TC()I"°€iiI1g1y, 'a:E1.;%'=. "~. "

appellant', has de3p::>s§i.€d Rs,3?.,O5,O{:sj§jf;_.«'V'~'._,. before {hm E-i0r:'bI<:>. Court: by ac:<:0ur;t'.__§2zye'é.A.:"

Cheque bearing ?v70.1594~93 €1éﬁét:?. 2:rA.9,:2éV<3{<g Z which was mrdered is be dap0¥{é{iTt:e%Vd Tin Vysya Ba:1k,, High Cc)2.1r°'é: cyf K2t1:n21i.Vak;1. 3, Thfff paﬂies have VLe::tV'j§?ic§i1e§91:§; that the first resp.Q.nde;1t'"1nn:g1ya1Io{a?é'd jtfé Withdraw the 5331:? with accrued inijtzrest \2i;*1f«t'Ir»1_0'¥;i'Lv_ any further as ;CiaKr1a§;,;eé;"c):a* i1:re--2:ﬁé profit or towarfdﬁ V' V

4. "i»;'i-a;§__3,._su::»f;fi*.3ii1é%r1i;-V.a,_r:3ived, the above aippgal stffvrixfe-2:11.01 accerdingly, the ap p¢1I313€'. "of this Horible Court. £0 \TV'i~*Lit-11Ci'1"£.iW'v-_ 'fappeell. Iafenceg the .«.§:A:a§35pc1Ian'{:» " kindly be permitted to the appeal.

has paid the mart fest 2:21' on {E16 appeal m_em0r'an.dum fnay be kmdiy 0:°de:.r {,0 be refunded ':0 AA ':.h €" app@%1z-1:2: E11 {E16 i:1i€.r'€5si. Gf jE}.SfiC€ and ' -. ﬁ',{'§éZ§§.;§fw.

5: En view 9f the 3ubm1?sssion zxzadsz by the Eeanzssd '4 Cam2sseE_ for the pE,u"E§€;T8, ;3Eg1.c::3g {>21 remrd the i.:%srz*rr:':ss amd ;

X/' .2' '1, _/M". ..

X y §{.E¥'J';.?%§{). E'?8 1 //2006 {.',€}1'1C§i§.i{§EES Siaied in the 21§);3i§<:2£.'E§e:}:1 £§a.£.<3:d §.,3.2§0Z dug:

giggrzed by me appe§1a:1i', anti res§>:>::dem I"-50} zmci '£',b-s:__ir respeattive advc:>cai.es;, the .:1ppc:a}; féilezd by the a1pp{:t§i';af;{."vv. Siaxzdss dispossed of. Tbs irilpilglﬁﬁii j'udg-§n1é--3:1E' 3-33:1 ﬂeagxi'-é7e "

dated 2.6.2606 passed by the -~A'ci'di1;.i0ij;a1i Judge, BaI1ga10'rc: in O.S.N0.54« 1:'§3_f:2_(T)z(§T2, ';1s§. m(>dif:ied as per the terms 8: CV0:a:.é1i*i..iQn_shv.o£T_ﬁhé: fiied under Qrdei' 23 RL;I.~:*_ 3 r/'§z«"';'3V\:;'f{§:;--¥ 51_f§£' The amount in depousﬂﬂt '.2f.r'it.h accrued.

interest shall bf: through his Counsel ' 1*he:,v%VReg%:s-ﬁy igﬂﬁii-.§¢:.é;£ L0 Qéiund the court fee of Rs,1,68,2"f5§/*. "appellant, on the appeai 1'I1€ITiC)!,'£1.§'1d L1II1.Vi17nH'l'€ﬂia4LE'1y.'

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd vs Suraksha Hotels Pvt Ltd on 9 March, 2011

Bench: N.K.Patil, H.G.Ramesh