Karnataka High Court
Smt Jyothi Nagaraj vs Sri H P Nagaraj on 2 January, 2014
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
Bench: A.N. Venugopala Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO.1577/2012 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. JYOTHI NAGARAJ
W/O NAGARAJ
AGED 54 YEARS
R/O NO.1A, RAJMAHAL APARTMENTS
26-27, 9TH MAIN, RAJMAHAL VILAS
BANGALORE - 80
PRESENTLY RESIDING IN NO.1B
RAJMAHAL APARTMENTS
26-27, 9TH MAIN, RAJMAHAL VILAS
BANGALORE - 80.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI K.B.MONESH KUMAR, ADV. FOR
M/S. RAVI B.NAIK ASSOCIATES, ADVS.)
AND:
1. SRI H.P.NAGARAJ
S/O H.K.PANDITARADHYA
AGE 56 YEARS
R/O FLAT NO.1A, RAJMAHAL
APARTMENTS, 26-27
9TH MAIN, RAJMAHAL VILAS
BANGALORE - 80.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE DISTRICT
BANGALORE.
2
3. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR
BANGALORE NORTH (ADDL.)
YELAHANKA, BANGALORE.
4. SMT. H.R.SHARADHA RAVISHANKAR
W/O RAVISHANKAR VALI
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/O NO.3494/2, 'RAJATH'
MCC 'B' BLOCK, 6TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN
DAVANAGERE.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, HCGP FOR R2 & 3
SRI R.M.MALLIKARJUNA, ADV. FOR R-4
R1- SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE DISTRANT WARRANT DATED 16/26.12.2011
VIDE ANNEX-L, ISSUED BY R3, TO THE WP AND GRANT
INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE DISTRANT WARRANT
DATED 16/26.12.2011 VIDE ANNEX-L, ISSUED BY R3 TO
THIS WP.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
First respondent has suffered an adverse order dated 07.03.2008, in compliant No.336/2007, on the file of Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore, filed by the 4th respondent. The Commission while allowing the compliant directed 3 the first respondent herein to pay to the complainant - 4th respondent herein, Rs.9 lakhs with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of compliant till the realisation. To enforce the said order, a distrain warrant dated 23.09.2011 vide Annexure-L, having been issued by the 3rd respondent, this writ petition was filed on 12.01.2012, to quash Annexure-L and for grant of consequential reliefs.
2. On 20.12.2012, learned Advocate for the petitioner filed memo and submitted that after filing of this writ petition, the petitioner has paid the amount due and liable to be paid in terms of the warrant, as at Annexure-L. Along with the memo, Xerox copy of two demand drafts dated 10.03.2012 and 30.03.2012 for Rs.7 lakhs and Rs.9 lakhs respectively drawn in favour of the 4th respondent issued by Canara Bank was produced. Since there was no appearance for the 4th respondent, on 20.12.2012, the matter was adjourned 4 to today. Even today also, there is no appearance for the 4th respondent.
3. Since the memo filed by the petitioner on 20.12.2012, has remained uncontraverted by the 4th respondent and in view of the submission made by Sri. Monesh Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner, that the petitioner would discharge the liability in full i.e., in terms of order dated 07.03.2008 passed in complaint No.36/2007 vide Annexure-G, 3rd respondent is directed not to give effect to Annexure-L - distrain warrant dated 16.12.2011/26.12.2011. It is made clear that, if any further sum is due and payable in terms of the aforesaid order, as at Annexure-G, of the State Commission, the petitioner shall pay the same without giving room for the 3rd respondent to issue a fresh distrain warrant. Petitioner if has not discharged the liability in terms of the order, as at Annexure-G, it is open to the 4th respondent to execute the said order i.e., for realization of the sum, in terms thereof.
5
Petition stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE ca