Karnataka High Court
M/S.Annapurna Electronics vs M/S. Crompton Greaves Ltd on 29 July, 2010
Bench: K.L.Manjunath, B.S Patil
WA 2432/20 3 O
IN mxis HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT £3ANGAL0_Ig::«:
DATED THIS THE 291" DAY OF JULY. 20m.._~ A'
PRESENT V' I V
THE 1~~1ON*r31,E MR.JU"S'I'ICE _K..L,_MANJ'i}'N;$§1j:wf""V: 1'
AND:
THE HONBLE MR.'JfiJ"S:FlCfi"B'.$.PA'TiV'LAw.ei":i... :3
W.A'5No.24.3§"g'_'-eéggg '. I' V
BETWEEN: V A
M/s. ANNAPURNA EI,EC'IfI.?;C>l:\.Il:g';S'.e '
No.1/4, B1, l\}GE_Z.}?'« i~;I0u:,Se,£ '
Near ESI H0spi_té;l _ '
Krishnaiana Falyib-_r,--, "'
BANGALORE
Represented 'i Prciprietofi
Mr.U.S1'i1ii'Vas.' ' -»_ VA
Son of U.Diaananjay
Aged about :24 y"e';11'S'. _ ~ _ APPELLANT
_. V {By Sr}, };S1;ee.vatsaV, S--r.:C0u;'1se1}
3v:}".s,4 GREAVES LTD
Re,gisLe1fe.d LE:,i1C1€l' the provisions of
C0r1":pa=nies 'Act, 1956.
Having its registered office at
CG_.Hou"se, Dr.Am1ie Beasam Road.
5]" worn, MUMBAI 400 030.
'L/_--\1'so'at No. 10A, Jigani lndL1s1:'ia} Area.
fmekal Taluk,
' 'Bang;a101'e Rural Disirici,
BangaIorew562 106,
Repby its Marlagexw Corporate Legal
Sn' Ba1'11um1a1'1g W.Phira.
&/
WA 2432/2010
2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIEZS
FACILITATION COUNCIL
Khanija Bhavana. High Grounds
Bangalore 560 001.
By its Chairman/'I'he Commissioner for
Industrial Deveiopment and DiI'€CT,01' oi"
Industries & Commerce,
Bangalore.
3. THE PRESIDENT
Kainataka Small Scale Industrie's~
Association (KSSIA} I
No.2/"I06. 17?" Cross,
Magadi Chord Road, '
Vijayanagar,
BangaIoreA56O 040
Syndicate Bank__, .. '
Regional Office_ _ .-
No.69.p.9w.Mai_1i, 'it1._131o.ck.._ ' '
Jayanagar,' '~ _ A
Ba11ga1.ore-- 5600 A. "
4. THE GENERAL 'i;?:_utNAot_sR. si.B'c::' I.
5. THE E3XE'."C_U"I'I_VI§ oiasoijoa (FINANCE)
Kainataka StateFinai':cial Corporation
Recgiveijrmii, Head Oifice
K.S..F.C,'-...Bhavan, """ "
. No.1/1', Tijhifiiinaiah Road,
sa_:igaieije 5'60 052. RESPONDENTS
(By.'Si.f'i'VUdayaIs:E-iolila. Si'.CounseI for R1)
=i=**
V' I This Writ Appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Ka1'I1atak.a
_ aHi'gh"C--o1.1i*1. Act praying to set aside the order passed in the writ
____"peti§;ion No.12465/2010 dated 16.4.2010.
This Appeal Coming on for Final Disposal this day.
A I' " "MANJUNATH, J., made the IoIlowing:--
?v/
WA 2432/2010
Q
JUDGMENT
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. The appellant was respondent _l l _ in W.13.No.12645/2010. The said writ' petition by respondent No.1 herein challenging the...o_ifder 0' passed by the V1 Addl. City Civil Judge. i;iae_:geiie;?e; §}viiei-Iemieei- the writ p€ElllOI16l' was directed deposit 75% oi 'the award,"
amount on or before 12.04.2010, lwasvlpagiised based on the application filed by _appe§_ianI:*=h'erein under Section 19 of the Micro, Smalland Medium Vl3r1etei5§j'rises./"ijevelopmeni Act. 2006 {hereir1alft.ef'_re_fe:irifeci¢t'o.l_as _'thewACt,'. for short). It was the COr1t61'1tlO11f)l the writ' lpetbiltion'e.r"'befoi'e the learned Single Judge that such an was not required to be deposited by the .ll.VvT1t peti.tio:1e1*--i,A. since lthellwr-it petition was filed challenging the . l ' ¢-,--« ~.
'a_i'u,1llity. 'When an order is cont.i'ary to Section 19 Aclteltliere was no necessity for the writ petitioner to 'deposit of the amount. as iequired under Section 19 of the _ Am The learned Single Judge has disposed oi" the Writ petition. 00 " --. «~grarit.irig liberty to the writ". pet.itioiier to fui°nish Baiik GU.'c11'El1'1.l€€ to the tune of 75% VVllI.l"i1I"i a period of two weeks by holding that WA 2432/2010 a party is required t.o comply with Section 1.9 of the ACt,--""-Beiiig aggrieved by the order of the Iearned Single Judgerflthelptfeseiit appeal is filed.
4. The main contention of the learnedl'Senior._'C--o'unsleldMr. Sreevatsa appearing for the appellant. is'.._th:»1t Single Judge has held that a to "Section 19 of the Act, he has cornr_nii;t.edVA the writ petitioner to furnish of 75% when the requirement" and the writ petitioner the amount in Cash.
Thc%rei'ore.l'lteV to aside t.he order passed by the learned Sin gle V it
5. Pei: [peontrai 'lie'arnVectT.Senior Counsel Mr.Uday Holla .app'eai'ingE5f'or"respondent No.1 submits that the learned Single vdtcionisider the case of the parties on merits and t.hat,Ab§Vz of the sttattement made at the bar, the writ
-w__pet,it.ionerystas permitted to furnish the bank guarantee, under « tzvhiclii. Egireumstemoes the present order is passed. Learned it Senior Counsel taking us through the grounds urged in the writ ~ _:.Vpetit.ion submits that the learned Single Judge has not given findings on all the grounds urged by the parties. Therefore. he ('9 WA 2432/2010 prays the Court to refer the nlatter to the learned Si1'1g1e___Judge with St request to reconsider all the grourids urged b_;Wi.l'i«e 'vt{1'it. petitioner since the order has been made by Way of'L3o11s'ei1:'t l V.
6. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. S1?eeVéit.s3.._ Subi:1ii't_s 't':_hg1Vt."st1el.1 a concession was not made by the appelleint_'.'s Cot1_r1se'l. *
7. Admittedly, the appellant 'vlf°.t',r:td' the ':E:':€1'V1'Ci€3S of artother Senior Counse1;:'=b_et'oi"'e. ._ l.ea.;.i1ed Single Judge. Therefore, we are not in a 1)osi:t_'ion"t.oV eit.h§.i?.:'qa.e'(.;ept or reject the Contention urged' i;j:y_f'l*1e l=ea1';1ed Senioi--..Cotir1set in this appeal. In the eircuin;star.teeVs',V' t:or1si*d'eifi'1;vgVijihe-grounds urged in the writ. petition. as 't.he'--said Vgro'1inids'"are" ---not considered by the learned Single Judge, We lliawel no. optlgjn than to request the leetrned Single Jtidge to i*econ's.i.de1' the matter afresh in aceordariee with léiw s.ett.inAgvA.asi'de.the impugned order. Accordingly, this writ petiti"onx'is_disp?§'sed~ Sd/3 JUDGE Sd/4 JUBGE