Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 13191 Kant
Judgement Date : 21 November, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
W.A. No.210 OF 2021 (GM-RES)
IN
W.P. No.41610 OF 2015 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/S. KIDS CLINIC INDIA PVT LTD
NO.1533, 9TH MAIN
JAYANAGAR 3RD BLOCK
BANGALORE-560 01
REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
SRI. ROHIT M.A.
... APPELLANT
(BY MS/MRS. ARCHANA K.M. ADV., FOR
MR. RAJADITHYA SADASIVAN, ADV.,)
AND:
1. KARNATAKA MEDICAL COUNCIL
NO.70, 2ND FLOOR, VAIDYAKEEYA BHAVANA
K.R.ROAD, (NEAR BASAVANAGUDI POST OFFICE)
BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU-560 004
REP BY REGISTRAR.
2. SMT. SUNITHA NITTOOR
AGED 30 YEARS
W/O MANOJ NITTOOR
NO.2368, 12TH MAIN ROAD
2
2ND STAGE, A BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR
BENGALURU-560010.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. BASAVARAJ S. SAPPANNAVAR, ADV., FOR R1
MR. CHIDANAND KULKARNI, ADV., FOR R2)
---
THIS W.A. IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL BY
SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE SINGLE JUDGE IN
W.P.NO.41610/2015 (GM-RES) DT:10.12.2022 AND PRAYS
FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE NOTICE
BEARING NO.KMC/28Exp/2015 DATED 15/09/2015 AND
OPINION BEARING NO.KMC/BUDCDRF/01/2013 DATED
5/3/2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND
CONSEQUENTLY QUASHING OF EXECUTION PROCEEDING
FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, PENDING BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT AND FOR SUCH OTHER ORDER,
DIRECTION AND DECLARATION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT
MAY DEEM FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF
THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EUITY.
THIS W.A. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
This intra Court appeal has been filed against
the order dated 10.12.2020 passed by the learned
Single Judge by which the writ petition preferred by
the appellant has been dismissed.
2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly
stated are that the Karnataka Medical Council issued
a notice dated 15.09.2015 to the appellant which is a
hospital. The appellant challenged the validity of the
aforesaid notice in a writ petition which was disposed
of by an order dated 10.12.2020 passed by the
learned Single Judge.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted
that the controversy involved in this appeal is no
longer res integra and is covered by orders of this
Court dated 28.01.2015 and 14.06.2019 passed in the
case of appellant itself.
The aforesaid fact has not been disputed by the
learned counsel for the respondent No.3.
4. For the aforementioned reasons, order dated
10.12.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge is set
aside. The impugned notice dated 15.09.2015 insofar
as it pertains to appellant is hereby quashed.
In the result, the appeal is allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RV
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!