Karnataka High Court
Mrs/ Vijanath Industries Pvt. Ltd vs The Authorized Officer on 2 June, 2022
Bench: Krishna S Dixit, P.Krishna Bhat
-1-
WA No. 100155 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF JUNE, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.KRISHNA BHAT
WRIT APPEAL NO. 100155 OF 2022 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
1. MRS/ VIJANATH INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,
PLOT NO. 107, SINOLLI VILLAGE,
TQ. CHANDAGAD, DIST. KHOLAPUR
BY ITS DIRECTORS
DEEPAK S/O PARASHRAM BIRJE
AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. SR NO.15, MALAPRASHA NAGAR,
TAGGIN GALLI, BELAGAVI-590005.
2. JEEVAN S/O PARSHRAM BIRJE
AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. SR NO.15 MALAPRASHA NAGAR,
TAGGIN GALLI, BELAGAVI-590005
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI. SADIQ N GOODWALA, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
AND:
JAGADISH T R
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA,
1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
DHARWAD
Date: 2022.06.03
11:20:11 +0530 UNION BANK OF INDIA
REGISTERED OFFICE, 1049/B-2
TILAKWADI, KHANAPUR ROAD,
BELAGAVI-590006
2. M/S. MASTER PRECISION
REPRESENTED BY PARTNERS
A) SANJEEV PATIL
-2-
WA No. 100155 of 2022
B) BASWANT P PARMOJI,
BOTH PARTNERS OFFICE
AT 7-2 GAJANAN NAGAR,
UDYAMBAG, BELGAUM - 590008
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GIRISH S. HULAMANI, ADV., FOR R1;
SMT. KANCHAN S. ADV., FOR R2)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON BLE COURT TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 22.03.2022 PASED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE IN W. P. NO.100144/2022 BY MODIFYING THE ORDER OF
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
KRISHNA S DIXIT J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This intra-court appeal seeks to lay a challenge to
the judgment dated 22.03.2022 made by a learned Single
Judge of this Court in W.P.No.100144/2022. Its operative
portion reads as under:
"ORDER
i. The Writ Petition is partly allowed.
ii. The order dated 06.12.2021 passed by the DRT
in ASA No.91/2021 is partly set aside. In that,
the disposal of ASA is set aside.
WA No. 100155 of 2022
iii. The proceedings in ASA No.91/2021 are
restored on the file of the DRT for complete and
final adjudication of the dispute raised by the
petitioners, which shall be so done within a
period of 60 days from the date of receipt of
copy of this order.
iv. The amount in deposit is directed to be
transferred to the DRT failing which the same to
be refunded to the petitioners for onward
deposit before the DRT which shall be done
within a period of 21 days from today.
v. It is made clear that this Court has not
expressed any opinion on the auction being
carried out."
2. After service of notice, the respondent-Bank
has entered appearance through its panel counsel, who
opposes the appeal. Similarly, the auction buyer who got
arraigned as second respondent to the proceedings, at a
later stage, having been represented by a private counsel
also opposes the appeal contending that the impugned
order has benefited the appellants and they having taken
such benefit, now cannot turn around to lay a challenge to
WA No. 100155 of 2022
the same; so contending, both the counsel seek dismissal
of the writ appeal.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and having perused the appeal papers we are not inclined
to grant much indulgence in the matter except to a very
limited extent that the matter having been remanded to
the DRT by the learned Single Judge, both the sides
should address arguments there on 22nd June, 2022. No
party shall seek any adjournment in the matter; till after
the remand is decided; the sale certificate shall not be
registered and that the said certificate shall be subject to
outcome of the remand; the DRT is requested to hear and
dispose of the matter within an outer limit of 30.06.2022.
It hardly needs to be said that the appeal in
S.A.No.173/2022 shall be taken up for consideration along
with the remanded matter in S.A.No.91/2021.
4. The learned senior counsel Sri. Jayakumar S
Patil, appearing for the appellants graciously agree that
the complaint filed before the Karnataka State Bar Council
WA No. 100155 of 2022
against Smt. Kanchan S., shall be withdrawn; similarly
Smt. Kanchan S., undertakes that she shall not be
representing auction buyers or any other parties to the
subject proceedings before the DRT.
All contentions are kept open.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
YAN
