Regus Bangalore Suburb Centre Private ... vs Raj Menda (Director) on 5 September, 2017

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Regus Bangalore Suburb Centre Private ... vs Raj Menda (Director) on 5 September, 2017

Bench: Jayant Patel

                        1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2017

                     PRESENT

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL

                       AND

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A.PATIL

                C.C.C. NO.687/2017

BETWEEN

REGUS BANGALORE SUBURB CENTRE
PRIVATE LIMITED,
HAVING AN OFFICE AT:
LEVEL 1, TOWER 'B',
REGUS MILLENIA NO.1 & 2,
MURPHY ROAD,
ULSOOR, BENGALURU-560 008.
R/BY MR.MAXY FERNANDES,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY.                ...COMPLAINANT

(BY SRI.SEETHARAM, ADV., FOR
SMT.MEENA.V.KOCHHAR, ADV.,)

AND

  1. RAJ MENDA (DIRECTOR),
     AGED MAJOR,
     RMZ INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED.

  2. SIDHARTH MENDA (CEO)
     AGED MAJOR,
     COWRKS COWORKING SPACES
     PRIVATE LIMITED,
                            2

  3. MR.RAJ MENDA,
     AGED MAJOR,
     CORPORATE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING
     DIRECTOR,
     RMZ INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,

  4. MR.SIDHARTH MENDA,
     AGED MAJOR,
     CEO,
     COWRKS COWORKING SPACES
     PRIVATE LIMITED,

     ALL ARE HAVING ITS
     REGISTERED OFFICE AT:
     LEVEL 12-14, TOWER 'B',
     THE MILLENIA NO.1 & 2,
     MURPHY ROAD,
     ULSOOR,
     BENGALURU-560 008.                 ...ACCUSED

     THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 & 12 OF
THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 R/W RULE 3 OF
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (CONTEMPT OF COURT
PROCEEDINGS) RULES 1981, BY THE COMPLAINANT,
PRAYING TO ISSUE NOTICE TO THE ACCUSED TO SHOW
CAUSE TO CONTEMPT INITIATED FOR WILLFUL
DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED MARCH 3, 2017
PASSED IN MFA NO.89/2017 C/W MFA NO.258/2017.

     THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
JAYANT PATEL J. MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                        ORDER

No details are specifically mentioned for the date on which agreement was entered into for the alleged breach of the order of this Court. Further, the matter 3 is at large pending before the Arbitrator and as stated by the complainant the matter is at the stage of cross-examination of the accused.

2. In these circumstances, we are not inclined to initiate action under the contempt of court. However, as the matter is pending with the Arbitrator, the complainant may approach to the Arbitrator for appropriate relief and at that stage the rights and contentions of both the sides shall remain open to be considered in accordance with law.

Subject to the aforesaid observations, the present contempt case is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE TL CT:RG

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court