Mr R Shivakumar vs The Chief Manager on 24 January, 2018

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mr R Shivakumar vs The Chief Manager on 24 January, 2018

Bench: A.S.Bopanna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF JANUARY, 2018

                      BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA

       WRIT PETITION NO.302/2018 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

MR. R SHIVAKUMAR
CHAIRMAN ASSOCHAM KARNATAKA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
S/O LATE RAJANNA
ADDRESS: ASHIRWAD TOWERS,
1ST FLOOR, 75/11, 2ND MAIN ROAD,
VYALIKAVAL, BANGALORE-560 003
                                   ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI PADMANABHA MAHALE, SR.COUNSEL FOR
    SRI SUNIL KUMAR H, ADV.)


AND:


1.     THE CHIEF MANAGER
       STATE BANK OF INDIA
       VYALIKAVAL BRANCH
       BANGALORE-560 003


2.   THE PRESIDENT
     ASSOCIATED CHAMBERS OF
     COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
     NO.5, SARDAR PATEL MARG,
     CHANAKYAPURI
     NEW DELHI -110021


3.   THE SECRETARY GENERAL
     ASSOCIATED CHAMBERS OF
                         -2-


     COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
     NO.5, SARDAR PATEL MARG,
     CHANAKYAPURI,
     NEW DELHI-110021
4.   THE SECREATRY
     DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
     VIDHANA SOUDHA
     BENGALURU-560001
                                 ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI M S VINAYAKA, ADV. FOR R1
    SRI M S SHYAM SUNDAR, ADV. FOR R2 & 3
    SRI K.P. YOGANNA, HCGP. FOR R4)



     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE R-1 TO DE-FREEZE THE ACCOUNT NO.
37333040362 IN THE NAME OF GREEN ENERGY SUMMIT
AND ALLOW THE PETITIONER TO OPERATE THE BANK
ACCOUNTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEBIT AND CREDIT
FROM THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS.


    THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                     ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court assailing the action of the respondent No.1 - Bank in freezing the account No.37333040362 in the name of Green Energy Summit and allow the petitioner to operate the Bank Account.

-3-

2. The case of the petitioner is that they are organizing the Green Energy Summit - 2018 in Tripura Vasini Palace Grounds, Bangalore from 1st to 4th February, 2018. In that regard the petitioner has also approached respondent No.4 and the Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Ltd., (for short 'KREDL'). In view of the recommendation by KREDL, the amount of Rs.1 crore has been approved and sanctioned to the petitioner towards holding the Summit. When this was the position, the respondents No.2 and 3 had raised objections with the respondent No.1 - Bank with regard to the operation of the accounts since according to respondents No.2 and 3, respondent No.1 was misleading that they are conducting the Summit, though the respondents No.2 and 3 were not taken into confidence and in that regard it is contended that the amount being utilized is without the appropriate approvals of respondents No. 2 and 3. -4-

3. In the above circumstance when this Court had taken note of these aspects and issued notice, it was at that stage noticed that respondent No.4 was also a necessary party to the matter and it emerged at that point that the amount of Rs. 1 crore is being sanctioned through KREDL for the said Summit. On the last date of hearing this Court had therefore directed that a meeting be convened to take note of these aspects and respondent No.4 was in that light directed to take note of the rival claims between the petitioner and the respondents No.2 and 3.

4. The learned Government Advocate has filed a memo dated 24.01.2018 enclosing thereto the proceedings of the meeting held on 20.01.2018. It is no doubt true that the representatives of respondents No.2 and 3 were not present in the meeting but the respondent No.4/State has taken note of the developments and in that light has directed that the finance given to the petitioner through KREDL is to be withdrawn.

-5-

5. If that be the position, the State funding towards the Summit is presently being withdrawn and the said amount which has been credited to the account that has been frozen is to be returned. In view of the decision of respondent No.4, the amount as deposited to the account bearing No.37333040362 is to be returned by the petitioner to the State. The petitioner shall therefore issue necessary instructions to respondent No.1 - Bank to credit the amount through RTGS to the account of the State/KREDL to be furnished to the Bank towards repayment of the said amount. On the amount being transferred in such manner, the respondent No.1 - Bank shall de-freeze the account and permit the petitioner to operate the same subject to there being no other orders issued by any other Court in that regard.

Insofar as the private dispute between the petitioner and the respondents No. 2 and 3, it is open for them to seek appropriate remedies in accordance with law and in that regard if any directions are issued -6- therein, the same shall be brought to the notice of the respondent No.1 - Bank.

Further as pointed out by the learned counsel for the Bank an Indemnity Bond may also be secured from the petitioner to permit them to operate the account.

In terms of the above, petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE SPS/bms

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court