Karnataka High Court
M/S.Gvpr Engineers Ltd vs Gulbarga Electiricity Supply ... on 13 January, 2022
Bench: S G Pandit, Anant Ramanath Hegde
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
COMAP No.100005/2021
BETWEEN:
M/S.GVPR ENGINEERS LTD.,
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT 8-2-293/82/A, PLOT NO.739-A
ROAD NO.37, JUBILEE HILLS,
HYDRABAD-33, BRANCH OFFICE AT NO.103,
LAEHZAR APARTMENTS
NO.45/1-2, PLACE ROAD, BENGALURU-01
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER (PROJECTS)
SRI.N.V.RAMANA REDDY.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.RAMACHANDRA MALI, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. GULBARGA ELECTIRICITY SUPPLY CO.LTD.,
(GESCOM) HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE
AT MAIN ROAD, GULBARGA-585102.
REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN & M.D.
2. CHIEF ENGINEER (ELECY)
GULBARGA ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO.LTD.,
(GESCOM) OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ELE)
CORPORATE PLANNING, GESCOM MAIN ROAD,
GULBARAGA-585102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.B.S.KAMATE, ADVOCATE)
2
THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S.37(1) OF ARBITRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, READ WTIH SECTION 13(1A) OF THE
COMMERCIAL COURT ACT, 2015, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.04.2019 MADE IN THE
ABOVE A.S. NO. 24/2019 (OLD NO. 5/2016) PASSED BY THE IV
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT)
AT BALLARI THEREBY CONFIRMING THE AWARD PASSED BY
THE SOLE ARBITRATOR DATED 15.05.2013 AS THE SAME
BEING ILLEGAL, ERRONEOUS AND NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW
AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW/DECREE THE PETITION FILED BY
THE APPELLANT UNDER SEC.34 OF ARBITRATION AND
CONCILLATION ACT, 1996 IN A.S NO.24/2019 (OLD NO.
5/2016) ON THE FILE OF IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT) AT BALLARI AS PRAYED FOR
THEREIN IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING-
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY, ANANT
RAMANATH HEGDE J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This commercial appeal is filed questioning the order
dated 27.4.2019 passed by the IV Addl. District and
Sessions Judge (Commercial Court), at Ballari in
AS.No.24/2019, wherein the application Under Section 34
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'the
Act') filed by the petitioner is rejected.
2. Though the matter is listed for admission, with
consent of both the parties, the matter is taken up for final
hearing.
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well
as respondents.
4. We have perused the records placed before us.
5. From the records, it is apparent that the
Arbitration suit in AS No.5/2016 filed by the present
appellant before Principal District and Sessions Judge,
Kalburgi is transferred to commercial Court at Ballari.
Pursuant to the notification dated 31.7.2018, establishing
commercial Court in Ballari, the Principal District and
Sessions Judge, Kalburgi vide order dated 23.2.2019,
transferred the matter to the Commercial Court at Ballari.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that on transfer
of the case to the Commercial Court at Ballari, no notice is
served on the present appellant and the case is dismissed
on merits without there being any notice to the appellant.
The paragraph No.8 of the impugned judgment would read
as under;
"The plaintiff did not put his appearance.
Since, the record revealed that before
transferring the case, due notice was ordered,
no further notice is ordered. However,
intimation is given to the plaintiff/his counsel
over his phone number, but it went in vain."
6. From the above said paragraph, it is evident
that the Court has not issued notice to the present
appellant, who was the plaintiff before the Court at Ballari.
Thus, it is apparent that notice was not issued to the
plaintiff intimating the date of hearing. Assuming that the
notice was issued and plaintiff did not appear, the only
course open to the Court was to dismiss the case for non
prosecution and the Court could not have passed orders on
merits. Under these circumstances, we deem it appropriate
to set-aside the impugned order and to remit the matter
back to the Commercial Court to consider the case on
merits. It is made clear that there shall not be any fresh
notice from Commercial Court and parties shall appear
before the Commercial Court.
7. At this juncture it is brought to the notice of
the Court that now the commercial Court is established in
Bidar and another dispute is pending before the
Commercial Court at Bidar between the same parties.
Originally, the petition was filed before Commercial Court
at Kalburgi. Now the Commercial Court is established in
Bidar as well. Since, one dispute between the parties is
pending before the Commercial Court at Bidar, we deem it
appropriate to remit the matter back to the commercial
Court at Bidar.
Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part.
The judgment dated 27.04.2019, passed by IV
Additional District and Sessions Judge (Commercial Court),
Ballari in AS No.24/2019 (Old No.5/2016), is set-aside and
matter is remitted back to the Commercial Court at Bidar
for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
Parties are directed to appear before the Commercial
Court at Bidar on 21.02.2022 without waiting for any
further notice from the Court.
No order as to cost.
The Registry shall immediately transmit the records
to the Commercial Court at Bidar.
Pending applications, if any, do not survive for
consideration and accordingly, they are disposed of.
SD/-
JUDGE
SD/-
JUDGE
am
