Karnataka High Court
Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd vs Rns Infrastructure Ltd on 18 November, 2020
Author: Krishna S.Dixit
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.12504 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)
c/w
WRIT PETITION NO.12502 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)
WRIT PETITION NO.12505 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)
IN W.P.NO.12504 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 'SHAKTI BHAVAN',
NO.82, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA-560001 INDIA
AND ALSO AT BTPS, KUDITHINI, BELLARY DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA-583152, INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
MR. D.R.KABADE
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. P.CHINNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.GURU PRASAD C. REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
RNS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MURUDESHWARA
BHAVAN,#604/B GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI, KARNATAKA-580030,
INDIA AND ALSO AT 7TH FLOOR, NAVEEN COMPLEX, #14, M.G.
ROAD, BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560001 INDIA REPRESENTED
BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
...RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
2
RECORDS IN COM.O.S.NO.764/2012 PENDING BEFORE THE
HONBLE COURT OF THE LXXXIII ADDL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSION JUDGE AT BENGALURU (COMMERCIAL COURT) C.C.H
NO.84); SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD.22.10.2020 ON
IA NO.16 IN COM O.S.NO.764/2012 PASSED BY THE HONBLE
COURT OF THE LXXXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AT BENGLAURU (COMMERCIAL COURT) CCH NO.84
ANNEXURE-A; AND ETC.
IN W.P.NO.12502 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956,
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 'SHAKTI BHAVAN'
NO.82, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA - 560 001, INDIA
AND ALSO AT BTPS, KUDITHINI, BELLARY DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA-583152, INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
MR D.R.KABADE
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. P.CHINNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.GURU PRASAD C. REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
RNS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956,
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MURUDESHWARA
BHAVAN,#604/B GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI, KARNATAKA-580030,
INDIA AND ALSO AT 7TH FLOOR, NAVEEN COMPLEX, #14, M.G.
ROAD, BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560001 INDIA REPRESENTED
BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
...RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS IN COM.O.S.NO.764/2012 PENDING BEFORE THE
HONBLE COURT OF THE LXXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (COMMERCIAL COURT)
3
(C.C.H.NO.84); SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED COMMON ORDER
DTD 08.10.2020 ON I.A.NOS.14-15 IN COM.O.S.NO.764/2012
PASSED BY THE HONBLE COURT OF THE LXXXIII ADDL. CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (COMMERCIAL
COURT) (C.C.H.NO.84) VIDE ANNX-A; AND ETC.
IN W.P.NO.12505 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 'SHAKTI BHAVAN',
NO.82, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA-560001 INDIA
AND ALSO AT BTPS, KUDITHINI, BELLARY DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA-583152, INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
MR. D.R.KABADE
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. P.CHINNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.LOMESH KIRAN.N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
RNS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MURUDESHWARA
BHAVAN,#604/B GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI, KARNATAKA-580030,
INDIA AND ALSO AT 7TH FLOOR, NAVEEN COMPLEX, #14, M.G.
ROAD, BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560001 INDIA REPRESENTED
BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
...RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS IN COM.O.S.NO.764/2012 ON THE FILES OF THE
LEARNED LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
COMMERCIAL COURTS DIVISION BENCH BENGALURU; SET
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD.9.10.2020 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
COMMERCIAL COURTS DIVISION BENCH BENGALURU AT
4
ANNEXURE-A IN COM.O.S.NO.764/2012 ALLOWING THE
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE RESPONDENT
PLAINTIFF I.E., A) APPLICATION UNDER ORDER XVI RULE 1 OF
THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 AND B) APPLICATION
UNDER S.151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE 1908; AND
ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner being the defendant in a commercial suit in Comm.O.S.No.764/2012 for a money decree is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court for assailing the order dated 22.10.2020, a copy whereof is at Annexure-A, whereby the learned LXXXIII Additional City Civil Judge at Bengaluru (CCH-84) having favoured respondent-plaintiffs' applications has reopened the case for facilitating the production & recording of further evidence.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines to grant indulgence in the matter mainly because the petitioner has a deferred remedy in the sense it can make the impugned order one of the grounds for laying a challenge to the judgment & decree if & when made adverse to its interest 5 in terms of Order XLIII Rule 1A r/w Section105 of CPC, 1908.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contends that the applications of the kind could not have been favoured in view of the decision of the Apex Court in BAGAI CONSTRUCTIONS Vs. GUPTA BUILDING MATERIAL STORE, AIR 2013 SC 1849; he specifically draws attention to paras 11 & 12 of the said decision; the essential fact which propelled the argued ratio therein is that the matter in that suit was already reserved for judgment which is not the case here; however, since liberty is being reserved to the petitioner to agitate against the impugned order after an adverse decree is passed, much is not being deliberated here, on the arguable questions.
4. It hardly needs to be stated that the petitioner shall have full opportunity of cross-examining the witnesses of the plaintiff's side and objecting to the marking of the documents in question, in accordance with law; it is kind obvious that the petitioner shall have right to adduce his additional evidence after the evidence of the plaintiff side is 6 accomplished pursuant to impugned order and the learned Judge of the Court below shall bear the same in mind.
The petitions are disposed off with the above observations, all contentions having been kept open.
Sd/-
JUDGE DS