Karnataka High Court
M/S Global Associates vs H.M.World City Apex Owners on 12 April, 2018
Author: B.V.Nagarathna
Bench: B.V.Nagarathna
-: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA
WRIT PETITION No.39367/2014 (CS-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/S. GLOBAL ASSOCIATES
A CO-OWNERSHIP HAVING ITS
OFFICE AT NO. 14, GENEVA HOUSE,
CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORISED SIGNATORIES.
a) MR. H.J. SIWANI
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
S/O. LATE J.K. SIWANI,
b) MR. M.J. SIWANI
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
S/O. LATE J.K. SIWANI. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: VIVEK B.N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI ABHINAV R.,
ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. H.M. WORLD CITY APEX OWNERS
WELFARE ASSOCIATION
APARTMENT NO.IVORY-103,
H.M. WORLD CITY APARTMENTS,
ANJANAPURA POST, J.P. NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 062.
RERESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.
2. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR
OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
CENTRAL REGION,
NO. 146, 3RD MAIN ROAD,
8TH CROSS, MARGOSA ROAD,
MALLESHWARAM,
BANGALORE - 560 003. ... RESPONDENTS
-: 2 :-
(BY SRI: SIDDAPPA V.D., ADVOCATE FOR SRI MITHUN
GERAHALLI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-1; SRI VIVEK HOLLA, HCGP
FOR R-2)
*****
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ORDER DATED 23.06.2014 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANN-
N AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Though this matter is listed for preliminary hearing in 'B' group, the learned counsel for the respective parties submit that since the dispute between the parties have been amicably settled and joint memo has been filed, the matter may be disposed of in terms of the joint memo dated 11.4.2018.
2. The petitioner herein has assailed order dated 23.6.2014 passed by the second respondent (Annexure N). The said order has been passed under the provisions of the Karnataka Flats (Regulation of ;the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management, and Transfer ) Act, 1972. By the said order, a direction was issued to the petitioner herein to furnish the accounts -: 3 :- regarding the expenditure met from the corpus funds within 30 days from the date of the order i.e., 23.6.2014.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for Respondent Nos 1 and 2 have submitted that though the mediation process has failed, nevertheless, the parties have settled their dispute amicably and a joint memo has been filed which is signed by the respective parties (along with office seal) and counsel. The same is taken on record. The authorized signatory of the petitioner Mr. H.J. Siwani is present before the Court. The learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the President of the first respondent-association is unable to present before the Court, but he has instructions to submit that the writ petition could be disposed off in terms of the joint memo. The Joint Memo dated 11.4.2018 reads thus:-
"The Petitioner and the Respondent No.1 humbly submit as follows:
(a) The Respondent No.1 had filed a dispute in DRBC/SAA-1/complaint/08/2012-13 invoking Section 5 of the Karnataka Ownership Flats (Regulation of the promotion of the Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) -: 4 :- Act, 1972 before the Respondent No.2 i.e., the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies seeking various directions against the Petitioner herein. The said dispute came to be allowed by the Respondent No.2 vide Order dated 23.06.2014 inspite of the objections (including that of jurisdiction) being raised by the Petitioner in the matter. The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the aforementioned Order dated 23.06.2014 passed by the Respondent No.2 in dispute No.DRBC/SAA-
1/complaint/08/2012-13.
(b) During the pendency of the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner and the Respondent No.1 have held discussions and have amicably settled the dispute with respect to maintenance dues, corpus fund, BWSSB, KPTCL and external infrastructure charges, Property Assessment and Khata charges, Car parking, Club Membership and DG deposit and other related aspects by virtue of a Memorandum of Settlement Agreement dated 13.05.2017, so as to put a quietus to the present matter. A copy of the Memorandum of settlement Agreement dated 13.05.2017 is annexed herewith along with the present Memo.
-: 5 :-(c) In the light of the Settlement Agreement dated 13.05.2017, the Respondent No.1 affirms that there shall be no claim/demand made either by Association or individual block apartment owners in respect of the maintenance dues, corpus fund, BWSSB, KPTCL and external infrastructure charges, Property Assessment and Khata charges, Car Parking, Club Membership and DG deposit from the Petitioner. Therefore, since the aforesaid matters are settled between the Petitioner and Respondent No.1, the Respondent No.1 hereby withdraws the dispute filed by the Respondent No.1 before the Respondent No.2 in DRBC/SAA-1/Complaint/08-2012-13.
(d) Both Petitioner and Respondent No.1 hereby affirm that the Settlement Agreement dated 13.05.2017 is limited to the issues of maintenance dues, corpus fund, BWSSB, KPTCL and external infrastructure charges, Property Assessment and /khata charges, Car Parking, Club Membership and DG deposit as mutually settled herein. The petitioner and the Respondent No.1 state that other pending issues, if any, are outside the scope of the Settlement Agreement dated 13.05.2017 and shall be dealt separately.
-: 6 :-(e) In view of the Settlement Agreement dated 13.05.2017 entered between the Petitioner and Respondent No.1, the Respondent No.1 has no objection for the Petitioner to withdraw the present Writ Petition. Therefore, the present Writ Petition does not survive for consideration and this Hon'ble Court be pleased to dispose of the same as settled out of Court in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 13.05.2017.
The memo may be taken on record and the present Writ Petition may be disposed of in the interest and equity."
The memo is taken on record. In light of the joint memo filed pursuant to settlement arrived at between the parties, the writ petition is disposed off in terms of the Joint memo as I find no legal impediment to do so.
Sd/-
JUDGE nm