Karnataka High Court
Karnataka Power Corporation ... vs M/S Aryan Energy Private Limited on 8 February, 2022
Bench: Ashok S.Kinagi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO.22832 OF 2021 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED
A GOVERNMENT COMPANY INCORPORATED
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
HAVING OFFICE AT NO.82, SHAKTHI BHAVAN
RACE COURSE ROAD
BANGALORE-560001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
MR. D GANGE GOWDA
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. AJAY J NANDALIKE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
M/S. ACB (INDIA) LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT 1956
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 7TH FLOOR
AMBIENCE CORPORATE TOWER,
AMBIENCE MALL, AMBIENCE ISLAND
NH-8, GURGAO-122010
BRANCH OFFICE AT HIGH POINT
PALACE ROAD
BANGALORE-560001
2
REPRESENTED BY
ITS GENERAL MANAGER (MARKETING)
MR. BALAJI RAMAMURTHY
....RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. S.H. PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 9.12.2021 PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE COMMERCIAL COURT IN EX.38/2020 ATTACHING
THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE PETITIONER VIDE
ANNEXURE-A.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner aggrieved by the order dated
9.12.2021 passed in Com.Execution No.38/2020 by
the LXXXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge
(CCH 83) Bengaluru has filed this writ petition.
2. The respondent filed a suit in
O.S.No.25577/2012 seeking for recovery of money
along with interest. The said suit was transferred to
Commercial Court and the same as renumbered as
Com. O.S.No.25577/2012. The Commercial Court
after full fledged trial, partly decreed the suit of the
respondent vide judgment and decree dated
13.12.2019. The petitioner aggrieved by the
judgment and decree passed in the aforesaid suit,
preferred Commercial Appeal 14/2020. The said
appeal came to be allowed in part and the judgment
and decree passed by the Trial Court was modified
only to the extent of interest portion.
3. The respondent filed Execution Petition
38/2020 before the Commercial Court for execution of
the judgment and decree passed in the aforesaid suit.
In the said Com. Execution, the respondent has filed
an application to issue attachment warrant of the
bank accounts as mentioned in the application. The
said application is opposed by the respondent. The
Trial Court passed the order on 9.12.2021 issuing
attachment warrant of the bank accounts as
mentioned in the application. Hence, the petitioner
filed this writ petition.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and also the learned counsel for the respondent.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the Trial Court without assigning any reasons has
proceeded to pass the impugned order. He further
submits that the impugned order passed by the
Executing Court is a cryptic order. Hence, prays to
allow the writ petition.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the
respondent supports the impugned order.
7. It is not in dispute that the respondent has
filed the suit for recovery of money against the
petitioner before the Commercial Court. The
Commercial Court after full fledged trial decreed the
suit of the respondent. The petitioner aggrieved by
the judgment and decree passed by the Commercial
Court preferred an appeal. The Appellate Court
allowed the appeal in part and modified the judgment
and decree passed by the Commercial Court.
8. The respondent filed the Execution Petition in
EP No.38/2000. In the said Execution Petition, the
respondent filed an application seeking attachment of
the bank accounts of the petitioner and also filed an
application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking
amendment of the Execution Petition. Further the
petitioner has also filed an application for dismissal of
the Execution Petition under Order XXI Rule 28 r/w
Section 151 CPC. The Trial Court has not passed any
order on the application filed by the respondent for
amendment of the Execution Petition and also has not
passed any order on the application filed by the
petitioner for dismissal of the Execution Petition under
Order XXI Rule 28 r/w 151 CPC. The Trial Court has
proceeded to pass the impugned order attaching the
bank account of the petitioner. The Trial Court while
passing the impugned order has not assigned any
reasons. The order passed by the Trial Court is a
cryptic order Further the Trial Court has not applied
its mind and proceeded to pass the impugned order.
The impugned order passed by the Trial Court is
arbitrary and capricious and the same is liable to be
set aside.
9. In view of the above discussion, the following
order is passed :
ORDER
i) The writ petition is allowed;
ii) The impugned order dated 9.12.2021 passed
in Execution Petition No.38/2020 is set aside.
iii) The Executing Court is directed to reconsider
the applications filed by the parties and pass
appropriate order in accordance with law.
SD/-
JUDGE
rs
