Karnataka High Court
Mullur Solar Parks Private ... vs Automotive Axles Limited on 17 March, 2022
Bench: Chief Justice, S R.Krishna Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 119 OF 2022
BETWEEN
1. MULLUR SOLAR PARKS PRIVATE LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
PLOT NO.1202, 1215A,
DOOR NO.8-2-293/82/A1202
S L JUBLEE ROAD, NO.61
JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD
TELANGANA - 500 033
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
SRI KUNAPULI NAGA VENKATA RAMA MURTHY
2. ECOREN ENERGY INDIA PVT. LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
PLOT NO.1202, 1215A,
DOOR NO 8-2-293/82/A1202
S L JUBLEE ROAD, NO.61
JUBLIEE HILLS, HYDERABAD
TELANGANA- 500 033
REP. BY DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
SRI KUNAPULI NAGA VENKATA RAMA MURTHY
...APPELLANTS
(BY MS.RITHIKA RAVIKUMAR AND
DRISHYA SHETTY, ADVOCATES FOR
LOMESH KIRAN N., ADVOCATE)
2
AND
1. AUTOMOTIVE AXLES LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
HOOTAGALLI INDUSTRIAL AREA
OFF. HUNSUR ROAD
MYSURU - 570 018
2. ALTILIUM CONSULTING LLP,
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
BEARING REG. NO. LLPINAAN-5990
AND HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT 1303
THE SLEUTHS GHS LTD., PLOT - 6
SEC. 19B, DWARAKA
NEW DELHI -110 075
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SIDDHARTH PADMARAJ DESAI, ADV. FOR R1 AND
SRI GIRISH KUMAR B.M., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)
THIS COMMERCIAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1) OF
THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, COMMERCIAL DIVISION AND
COMMERCIAL APPELLATE DIVISION OF HIGH COURTS ACT, 2015 R/W
SECTION 43 RULE 1(Q) OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23/11/2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE
COURT OF THE LXXXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
BENGALURU (EXCLUSIVE COMMERCIAL COURT) (C.C.H.89) IN THE
COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION APPLICATION (COMM.A.A.NO.134/2021)
PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A TO THIS APPEAL AND ETC.
THIS COMMERCIAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment
and order dated 23.11.2021 passed in Com.A.A.No.134/2021
by the LXXXVIII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge
(Exclusive Commercial Court), Bengaluru City, whereby, the
Commercial Court allowed the Arbitration Application filed by
respondent No.1 herein against appellants and respondent
No.2 under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996 read with Clause 10(3) of the Commercial Courts Act.
Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order, the
defendant Nos.1 and 2 before the Commercial Court preferred
the present appeal, in which the plaintiff is arrayed as
respondent No.1 while respondent No.2, who was arrayed as
defendant No.3 before the Commercial Court is only a formal
party against whom no reliefs are sought for.
2. Appellants as well as respondent No.1 have filed a
Joint Memo of Consent Terms today. Pursuant thereto, this
Court directed the said Joint Memo to be sent to the Registrar
(Judicial), who has submitted a report. The report of the
Registrar (Judicial) reads as under:
"This Hon'ble vide order dated 17.03.2022
in COMAP No.119/2022 has passed the following
order:
"Learned counsel for the appellants
submits that the appellants as well as
respondent No.1 have entered into
compromise and have settled their
dispute amicably outside the Court.
Joint memo of Consent Terms is filed
today. The same is taken on record. The
parties to the joint memo are present
before the Court.
Let the joint memo of Consent Terms
which has been filed today before the
Court be verified by the Registrar
(Judicial). The parties who are present
before the Court shall be present along
with their learned counsel before the
Registrar (Judicial). The report of the
Registrar (Judicial) regarding verification
of the joint memo of Consent Terms shall
be filed before the Court.
Put up at 2.30 p.m. today
(17.03.2022)."
2. It is submitted that the authorized
company, respondent No.1 and their respective
counsels appeared before me today at 1:15 p.m.
3. It is submitted that I have verified the
Joint Memo of consent terms filed by appellant
No.1 and 2 company, respondent No.1 and their
respective counsels.
4. It is submitted that the appeal was
represented on behalf of the appellant No.1 and 2
company by one Sri Kunapuli Naga Venkata Rama
Murhty. However, the joint memo has been
signed on behalf of appellant No.1 and 2 company
by one Sri Sreenivasulu Kancham. On perusal of
the Board Resolution dated 10.02.2022 produced
at Document No.1 and 2 along with the joint
memo of consent terms, it is stated that
Sri Sreenivasulu Kancham has been authorized to
sign the settlement agreements or settlement
application on behalf of the company in
connection with any case filed by / against the
Company in any Court or quasi-judicial authority
anywhere in India including the High Courts.
5. It is submitted that on verification of
the terms and conditions stated in the Joint Memo
of consent terms, it is seen that they are legal
and enforceable.
6. It is further submitted that the
authorized representative of appellant No.1 and 2
company and respondent No.1 have stated before
me that they have accepted the terms and
conditions stated in the compromise petition.
7. I have verified the original Identity
Cards of authorized representative of appellant
No.1 and 2 company and respondent No.1 and
the self attested copies of the Identity Cards are
enclosed herewith.
The report is submitted before the Hon'ble
Court for kind perusal."
3. We have perused the material on record including
the Joint Memo of Consent Terms as well as the report of the
Registrar (Judicial).
4. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, as
agreed between the parties, the present appeal is disposed of
in terms of the Joint Memo of Consent Terms.
SD/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
SD/-
JUDGE
SV
