Sri K V Naidu vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 2455 Kant

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                       PRESENT

       THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA

                         AND

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI

              W.A.No.1418/2021(GM-RES)
BETWEEN:

SRI. K.V.NAIDU
S/O K.C.NAIDU
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/AT NO.13, 4TH CROSS
GOWDARA COLONY, 1ST MAIN ROAD
R.M.V. 2ND STAGE, DOLLARS COLONY
BENGALURU-560 094.
                                            ...APPELLANT

[BY SRI. NANJA REDDY P.N., ADVOCATE (VC)]

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY THE
       DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF
       POLICE, NORTH DIVISION
       SIR C.V.RAMAN ROAD
       YESHWANTHPUR
       BENGALURU-560 022.

2.     INSPECTOR OF POLICE
       SANJAYNAGAR POLICE STATION
       SANJAYNAGAR MAIN ROAD
       CIL LAYOUT, 'A' BLOCK
       JUDICIAL COLONY
       RAJ MAHAL VILAS, 2ND STAGE
       BENGALURU-560 094.
                          -- 2 -




3.   M/s. MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED
     HAVING ITS OFFICE MUTHOOT CENTRE
     T.C.NO.27/3022, PUNNEN ROAD
     TRIVENDRUM, KERALA-695 034.
     REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED
     SIGNATORY AND REGIONAL MANAGER
     SRI.THOMAS.

4.   MR.W.F.MOSES
     ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT
     MUTHOOT FINCORP, MUTHOOT CENTRE
     TC NO.27/3022, PUNNEN ROAD
     THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
     KERALA-695 001.

5.   MR.THOMAS JOHN MUTHOOT
     MANAGING DIRECTOR
     MUTHOOT FINCORP, MUTHOOT CENTRE
     T.C.NO.27/3022, PUNNEN ROAD
     THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
     KERALA-695 001.

6.   MR.VIKRAMAN AMPALAKAT
     DIRECTOR, MUTHOOT FINCORP
     MUTHOOT CENTRE, T.C.NO.27/3022
     PUNNEN ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
     KERALA-695 001.

7.   MR. ANOOP GUPTA
     DIRECTOR
     INTEGRATED HOME SOLUTIONS
     PVT. LTD., NO.501/502
     BUILDING NO.2, 'A' WING
     PARK SITE, KAILAS INDUSTRIAL
     COMPLEX, VIKHROLI-WEST
     MUMBAI-400 079.
                                       ...RESPONDENTS

[BY SRI. A.S.VISHWAJITH, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R6 (PH)]


     THIS WA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE W.P.NO.22237/2021 DATED
14.12.2021 AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE
APPELLANT AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF/S AS THIS
HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
                           -- 3 -




     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, S.SUJATHA J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                   JUDGMENT

This intra-court appeal is directed against the

interim order dated 14.12.2021 passed by the Learned

Single Judge in W.P.No.22237/2021, whereby the interim

order has been passed as under:

" Interim order as prayed for subject to the petitioner depositing with the 3rd respondent - Muthoot Fincorp Limited, 30% of the amount due as on this date, as under:

(i) 10% within two weeks;

(ii) another 10% within next one week; and,

(iii) remainder i.e., 10% within one week next following,

failing which, the interim order shall stand rescinded on its own and that they may put the petitioner to the risk of petition being rejected as well."

2. The learned counsel for respondent no.3

submits that the writ appeal does not survive for

consideration on two counts:

Firstly, Writ Court had made it very clear that the

interim order shall stand rescinded on its own on the

-- 4 -

failure of the appellant to comply with the conditions of

the interim order and it was categorically observed that

they may put the petitioner to the risk of petition being

rejected as well.

3. Secondly, despite the said order, no compliance

of the interim order was made by the appellant depositing

any amount as directed by the Writ Court within the time

frame fixed. Consequently, E-Auction could not be held

that on 15.12.2021, as no bidders had come forward by

virtue of the interim order. In view of the E-Auction notice

dated 11.11.2021 time had also lapsed. For the reasons

aforesaid, this appeal deserves to be dismissed having

rendered infructuous.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant made an

attempt to contend that the conditions of the interim

order being the subject matter of this Writ Appeal, no E-

Auction would have been conducted on 15.12.2021 in

pursuance to the E-Auction notice dated 11.11.2021. The

interim order of staying E-Auction notice dated

11.11.2021 being in subsistence, the argument of the

-- 5 -

learned counsel for respondent no.3 deserves to be

rejected.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the

parties and perused the material on record.

6. The interim order dated 14.12.2021 makes it

clear that said order is subject to the conditions of

depositing 30% of the amount due as on that date i.e.,

(i) 10% within two weeks, (ii) another 10% within next one

week; and (iii) remainder 10% within one week next

following, failing which, the interim order shall stand

rescinded on its own and that they may put the petitioner

to the risk of petition being rejected as well.

7. In the absence of non-compliance of the terms

of interim order, mere filing of the Writ Appeal would not

come to the aid of the appellant to argue the matter on

merits inasmuch as the challenge made to prayer (a) in

the Writ Petition i.e., the challenge to the E-auction Notice

dated 11.11.2021.

8. As submitted by the learned counsel for

respondent no.3, no bidders having come forward for the

E-Auction to be held on 15.12.2021, no such auction was

-- 6 -

held. Thus, the E-Auction notice dated 11.11.2021 does

not survive for consideration. Reserving liberty to the

appellant to challenge the further proceedings of

respondent no.3, if any, if aggrieved, Writ Appeal deserves

to be disposed of as having rendered infructuous.

Ordered accordingly.

Writ Appeal stands disposed of as aforesaid ,

keeping open all the rights and contentions of the parties

with respect to other reliefs claimed in the pending Writ

Petition.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Psg*