M/S United Engineers (Malaysia) - Essar ... vs National Highway Authority Of ... on 8 April, 2008

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

M/S United Engineers (Malaysia) - Essar ... vs National Highway Authority Of ... on 8 April, 2008

Bench: Ravi Malimath

» 1 "H&€1ﬁ1ii.R§5&d__, Davanagere.

."'mAND:

PBE§E§'I'

'1'!-IE I-lON'BLE MR.CYRIAC JOSEPH__CHI_EP'JéS'!'i'(3E'_'   "  k

THE HON'BLE MR.JUS'TIﬂ_E RAVI'V'h1ALi!\]U{ljH.  }

wnrr APPEAL' NO.ﬂ QF  
BETWEEN:    " A 

1. Mia United. E=.r~,,-;=;a=.e-:m{_vsz1n.=_!sa.3,r.s.ai.;».3-%  

Emu' Pmjﬁcte. W1-. (-iJW%E=1mr  %

1 1, K.K.Ma%rf;,  .*.1-4:-..*ab.-s-;4.=s% 034.
Thmughyits   '

W 8 "Essex Fﬁrziccts "  
Rcpreaentqed by"i7;e.I.Dirccu:1~Tv'.e;ubcr

JV ';'3oamd &5'£)i1we'c1;or,. évﬁiagar Euojects Limited,

S.ri.'1'~. K;'Nagm'aj.:' -~ ., 1
M, .-,   !2ep:=%.....'...- ..y -.a
Dgmctor 81131'. K. Nagarag, =

Sir: Sfi.T.V.Kz'iSuLmJ"""7ﬁ'ﬁ1"t1'I,?'.

316.569] 'I, I Stagi:';"Sh1vak1nnara' Badavane,

g0

. . . . APPELLANTS

'  _ .'§[:'sRI.n.L.Mano, sR.couNsEL FOR
 SMA'l'.AKKAMAl-IADEVI HIREMATH, ADVOCATES.)

AM  "'h'ﬁﬁona1 Highway Authority of India (NHAI),

; G-S/'8, Sector 1 Dwamka.
New De1hi~1 10 045.



Repmyw!-.ted by .N..=R=Bt-.--mde'

------7'-

Manager (Tech) Chitradurga.

2. S.Shivaram, Sic Singaravelu
Project Directo' ' r ('UEM Essar J'v',
Ashitwad, Near Athani College,
No.2384, S.S.Layout, Davanagerek '

II J 1 wine»:

3:21.995. A. 2491.-I.r...n.,  Mdgsdszemra
65 PART ERS, Anvoxzxrs 2.-'on ck:/3.1.13;  

 _
Courtdclivered the'1blloxviu_;1g:- H _ .
CYRIAC    

This Writ  5:11; i'e)r.:61?zle1*a this day, the

 "tI1e..t1-etaidpomldenta 1 and 2 in Writ

Penman reo.1s52<3;§o;j7.ee:f1°1ae challenge in the Writ Petition

r  The  Peiiiion  mud u an: -t

 ~réé\pe1id§-;1;t_h§réin.

V' 2'... As per the impugned order dated 29.11.2007, the
   Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition and quashed

%  = V.  order dated 23.8.2007 passed by the learned Addl. Civil

/"*0:

.   .eaeeeeeee-med





Judge (Jr.Dn.), Davangere, in I.A.No.XI, in so that as it

ter'.::inat.-ed the valr..a_l.a_th oi' SxiRa_iashekha11ap1;ng;t-.44"'f9r

defendants 2 ---at 3, -we mm-...-....A an wzittez-.  p

by defendants 2 and 3.   

Single Judge passed the    ' 

notice to respondents 1 and .2

them. Aggrieved by the action in passing the the appellants have __

3. counsel for the appellants. the respondents and placed on record, we are clearly teamed Single Judge could not allowed the Writ Petition and 23.8.2Dﬂ?, '.-zith-eI.1.t issuing n-t_:ice and 2 ﬁe Peed.-.--- and hearing them. To extent, the impugned order is i-ience, the iniptigned order dated 29.1 1.2007 passed by the leamed Judge in Writ Petition No.185'20]2007 is set aside v~ the Writ Petition is temitted to the Single Bench for __J.. .I£__.___I .c___1_ _-.__:.J_ '_... ____'I _.A.___ 1____L.._ 41... HUSH CXJHBIIICIEIUUII uuu I.l.l!|PU8l:lI. l.'.I.Il.D.l. I-IUHIIIIK ' -- . |_.l.lC respondents in the Writ Petition also. Since the ._ have already notice of the matter, no fresh notioqitio = necessary in the Writ Petition. A I'\..._..l.. 1.1.... IIr__'.a. I"\_A.2A.2_ £1 _.g 'h I 1'03' Inc per msuer on 30.5.2008. Writ Aﬁpc! " stand if as ' *?Chie{ Iustice ._ 1.-.:-__'.;., .u'_'_ 1_.__'.l4' I".I'._'~_'I.'; V 1;. pcmnr. ms amgm: puncn

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court