Aneja Construction ( India) Ltd., vs State Of Karnataka, on 27 March, 2012

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Aneja Construction ( India) Ltd., vs State Of Karnataka, on 27 March, 2012

Bench: Dilip B.Bhosale

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                CIRCUIT BENCH AT DKARWAD

          DATED THIS THE   2
                           T H
                                  DAY OF MARCH, 2012

                           BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE DILIP B BHOSALE

          WRIT PETITION NO. 62348/20 12 (GM-CPC)


 BETWEEN:

      ANEJA CONSTRUCTIONS (INDIA) LTD.,
       M.F. HOUSE, NEAR KAVERI PUNJAB DHABA,
      P.B. ROAD, PALE, P.0: CHABBI, HUBLI
      BY ITS AUTHORIZED PERSON,
      PRITIPALSINGH,
      Sb. HARBAJANSINGH ANEJA
      AGE: 56 YRS. 0CC: BUSINESS,
      RIO. ABOVE SAID ADDRESS, AT: HUBLI.

                                                 PETITIONER
(By A C CHAKALABBI & ASSOCIATES, ADVS.


AND

      STATE OF KARNATAKA,
      REPTED. BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
      DHARWAD

2.    CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER,
      K.R.R.D.A. NIRMAN BHAVAN,
      II FLOOR,
      DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
      RAJAJINAGAR,
      BANGALORE.
                                  I




      WORKING UNDER PRIME MINISTER
      GRAM SADAK YOJANA
3.    THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
      (PROJECT DIVISION- DHARWAD)
      WORKING UNDER P.M.GS.Y. SCHEME
      ZILLA PANCHAYAT, DHARWAD.

4     THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
      WORKING UNDER P.M.G.S.Y. SCHEME,
      ZILLA PANCHAYAT, DHARWAD.

                                                .RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. MEGHA C. KOLEKAR, GCGP FOR Ri R2-R4 SERVICE AWAITED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE, DHARWAD IN O.S.NO.196/2012 ON 12/03/2012 ON LA. NOJ./201 2 (ANNEXURE A).

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

PC:

Learned Counsel for the petitioner prays for withdraw al of this petition with a liberty to the petitioner to file interim application in OS. No.646/2011 for appropriate relief. He submits that the petitioner shall file applicati on within a period of one week from today.

2. Petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed.

3. Learned Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 on instructions submits that the respondent shall not encash the bank guarantee for a period of two weeks, provided, the petitioner files an application as aforementioned within a period of one week from today. Her statement is accepted.

If the petitioner fails to file an application within a period of one week from today as aforementioned, the Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4 shall stand relieved of her statemen t.

4. It is needless to mention, if any order on l.A., that petitioner proposes to file, it will bind all the parties to the proceedings. The Court below shall dispose of l.A., filed by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of its filing.

sal Sma/

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court