Sri C N Mohan vs M/S Blue Whale Estates And Holding ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6936 Kant

                             1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                         BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

     CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.205/2021 (IO)

BETWEEN:

1.     SRI. C.N. MOHAN,
       S/O LATE NAGARAJU,
       AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
       R/A NO.328, 14TH MAIN ROAD,
       SADASHIVANAGAR
       BENGALURU - 560 080

2.     SMT. K.R. SUDHAMANI,
       W/O C.N. MOHAN,
       AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
       R/A NO.328, 14TH MAIN ROAD,
       SADASHIVANAGAR,
       BENGALURU - 560 080

3.     SRI. CHANNIGARAYAPPA
       S/O LATE CHIKKA VEERAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
       RESIDING AT BINNAMANGALA VILLAGE,
       KASABA HOBLI,
       DEVANAHALLI-562110
                                   ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. G. KRISHNAMURTHY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. G.K.BHAVANA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     M/S. BLUE WHALE ESTATES AND
       HOLDING PVT. LTD.,
       A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
                                 2


      THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
      HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT
      NO.294, SHANTHI NIKETAN APARTMENTS,
      39TH CROSS, 8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
      BENGALURU-560070
      REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
      MR. MANISH GAJRIA

2.    SRI. MARE GOWDA
      S/O B. NARAYANAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
      RESIDING AT BUDIHALA VILLAGE,
      DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
      YALIYURU POST,
      BENGALURU RURAL-10.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. JOHN PAUL A., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;
SRI. BHASKAR BABU H.J., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)

     THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 12.04.2021
PASSED ON IA.NO.VI IN O.S.NO.126/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE
II  ADDITIONAL    SENIOR    CIVIL   JUDGE   AND    JMFC.,
CHICKBALLAPUR, DISMISSING THE IA.NO.VI FILED UNDER
ORDER VII RULE 11 OF THE CPC., FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

This revision petition is filed by the defendant Nos.1,

2 and 3 in O.S. No.126/2018 pending trial before the Court

of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC.,

Chickballapur, (henceforth referred to as 'the Trial Court')

challenging an order dated 12.04.2021 by which an

application in I.A. No.VI filed by defendant Nos.1 and 2

under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for

short 'the CPC') was rejected.

2. After hearing the learned senior counsel for the

petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent

No.1, this Court suggested them to settle the dispute

amicably. Following the above, the parties have filed a

Compromise Petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with

Section 89 of the CPC, the terms of which read as follows:

"2. It is an admitted fact that the Respondent No.1 has paid a sum of Rs.2,30,00,000/- to the Petitioners under receipt-cum-advance karar and receipt.

3. The Petitioners and Respondent No.2 have filed written statement and petitioners 1 and 2 (Defendants 1 & 2 before the Trial Court) have filed an I.A No.6 under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC to reject the plaint as the same does not disclose the cause of action. The Respondent No.1 (Plaintiff) filed objections to the said application.

4. The Trial court dismissed the application on 12.04.2021 mainly on the ground that the contentions urged require trial. The petitioners have challenged the order of the trial court in the above Civil Revision Petition.

5. The above petition was heard on 13.12.2021, and it was suggested to resolve the dispute. Accordingly, the directors of the respondent No. 1 company namely Sri. Manish B. Gajria and Dhananjay Pandey and the petitioners 1 to 3 have negotiated the terms of settlement. The petitioners 1 to 3 have agreed to refund the advance amount of Rs.2,30,00,000 (Rs. Two Crores Thirty Lakhs only) along with additional sum of 1,70,00,000 (Rs.One Crore Seventy Lakhs Only) towards full and final settlement. The directors of Respondent No.1 have agreed to withdraw the suit OS 126/2018 referred to above as settled out of court and they will not claim any right, title, interest over the plaint schedule property.

6. The directors of the 1st respondent company namely Sri. Manish B. Gajria and Dhananjay Pandey have requested the petitioner 1 to 3 to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores Only) in the name of Sri. Manish B. Gajria since sum of Rs., 2,30,00,000/- (Rs. Two Crores

Thirty Lakhs only) has been transferred from the account of Sri. Manish B. Gajria to the 1st Respondent company accordingly the Petitioners 1 to 3 have agreed for the same subject to the following terms:

a. Mr. Manish B. Gajria has to undertake that in the event of any claim by any person, authorities against the petitioners and Respondent No. 2 solely on the ground the petitioners have settled the dispute in question and paid amount of Rs.

4,00,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores Only) to Sri. Manish B. Gajria the same will be indemnified by him for such claim for which Sri. Manish B. Gajria has agreed.

b. Mr. Manish B. Gajria hereby undertakes that in the event of any claim by any person, authorities solely due to the payment made in this compromise, he will clear/pay the said amount and if any loss cause to the nd petitioners and the 2 respondent, Sri. Manish B. Gajria will indemnify the same.

This condition is incorporated since the company is struck off under Section 248 of the Companies Act of 2013.

7. The Petitioner No. 1 to 3 have issued the following cheques towards repayment of advance amount of Rs.2,30,00,000/ (Two Crore Thirty Lakhs Only) received from the 1st Respondent along with additional sum of Rs.1,70,00,000/ (One Crore Seventy Lakhs Only) agreed, in the following manner:

a. Cheque bearing No. 000679 dated 23.12.2021 for Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only) drawn on ICICI Bank, Vyalikaval Sadhashiv Nagar Branch, Bangalore in favour of Sri. Manish B. Gajria issued by Petitioner No. 2.

b. Cheque bearing No. 000913 dated 23.12.2021 for Rs.19,00,000/- (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs Only) drawn on ICICI Bank, Vyalikaval Sadhashiv Nagar Branch, Bangalore in favour of Sri. Manish B. Gajria issued by Petitioner No.3.

c. Cheque bearing No. 112323 dated 23.12.2021 for Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only) drawn on Federal Bank, Devanahalli Branch, Bangalore Rural in favour of Sri. Manish B. Gajria issued by Petitioner No.1.

d. Cheque bearing No. 000914 dated 23.01.2022 for Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs Only) drawn on ICICI Bank, Vyalikaval

Sadhashiv Nagar Branch, Bangalore in favour of Sri. Manish B. Gajria issued by Petitioner No.1.

e. Cheque bearing No. 000131 dated 23.02.2022 for Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs Only) drawn on HDFC Bank, Sadashivnagar Branch, Bangalore in favour of Sri. Manish B. Gajria issued by Petitioner No.1.

f. Cheque bearing No. 000130 dated 23.03.2022 for Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs Only) drawn on HDFC Bank, Sadashivnagar Branch, Bangalore in favour of Sri. Manish B. Gajria issued by Petitioner No.1.

g. Cheque bearing No. 000132 dated 23.04.2022 for Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs Only) drawn on HDFC Bank, Sadashivnagar Branch, Bangalore in favour of Sri. Manish B. Gajria issued by Petitioner No.1.

h. Cheque bearing No. 000133 dated 23.05.2022 for Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs Only) drawn on HDFC Bank, Sadashivnagar Branch, Bangalore in favour of Sri. Manish B. Gajria issued by Petitioner No.1.

8. The drawee of the cheque is entitled to present the cheque and encash the same on the respective date of the cheques.

9. The plaintiff or its directors or anyone claiming through or under them shall not have any right title interest or claim over the plaint schedule properties and they will not press the prayer made in the plaint. The Receipt cum advance karar dated 06.05.2015 (Referred in Receipt) and the receipt under which the aforesaid Rs.2,30,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores Thirty Lakhs Only) paid as stated above is treated as cancelled.

10. The Respondent No.1 will not press the suit against the Defendant No.4 (Respondent No.2) before the trial court hence suit against the Defendant No.4 may be dismissed as not pressed.

11. The parties pray that the suit may be decreed in terms of this compromise. The court fee paid by the plaintiff may be ordered to be refunded to the plaintiff."

3. It is seen from the plaint in O.S. No.126/2018

that the suit was filed for specific performance of a Receipt

Cum Advance Karar dated 06.05.2015 and for perpetual

injunction. As a result of the compromise, the defendant

Nos.1 to 3/petitioners have agreed to refund the advance

amount of Rs.2,30,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores Thirty

Lakhs only) received by them from the plaintiff/respondent

No.1 along with ex gratia of Rs.1,70,00,000/- (Rupees One

Crore Seventy Lakhs only) and the plaintiff has agreed to

give up the reliefs sought in O.S. No.126/2018. Learned

counsel for the plaintiff / respondent No.1 herein has

acknowledged the receipt of the entire sum of

Rs.4,00,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores only) from the

defendant Nos.1 to 3.

4. Petitioners / Defendant Nos.1, 2 and 3 are

present before the Court. Mr. Manish Gargia, Director of

the respondent No.1 herein, is also present. They are

identified by their respective counsel. Parties have

accepted the terms of the compromise and in token of

their acceptance of the terms of the compromise, have

signed the order sheet of this Court.

5. Since the compromise entered into between

the parties is lawful and does not offend any provisions of

law, the same is accepted. As a result, this Revision

Petition and the suit in O.S. No.126/2018 pending trial

before the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and

JMFC., Chickballapur, are disposed off in terms of this

Compromise Petition.

The Trial Court shall refund the Court fee to the

plaintiff in accordance with law. It shall also return the suit

documents to the defendant Nos.1, 2 and 3 after obtaining

an authenticated copy of the same.

Sd/-

JUDGE

sma