Karnataka High Court
Ravindra S/O Dundappa Kittur vs The Government Of Karnataka on 13 January, 2023
Bench: S.R. Krishna Kumar
-1-
WP No. 100033 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 100033 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
RAVINDRA S/O DUNDAPPA KITTUR,
AGE 50 YEARS, OCC. CLASS I CONTRACTOR,
R/O GOKAK, TQ. GOKAK.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BELAGAVI 590002
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER
OFFICE OF MINOR IRRIGATION
NORTH ZONE VIJAYPUR 587101
3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
MINOR IRRIGATION
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN BELAGAVI CIRCLE
KATTIMANI
BELAGAVI 590002
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN KATTIMANI
Date: 2023.01.20
10:17:56 +0530
4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
MINOR IRRIGATION
DIVISION BELAGAVI
BELAGAVI 590002
5. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
MINOR IRRIGATION
SUB DIVISION GOKAK
GOKAK 590002
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRASHANT V.MOGALI, HCGP)
-2-
WP No. 100033 of 2023
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A.
ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED
28.11.2022 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, GOKAK IN REVIEW PETITION NO.1/2018 WHICH IS
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAID
REVIEW PETITION NO.1/2018 BY SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 03.03.2018 PASSED BY THE I
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GOKAK WHICH
IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D. B. CONSEQUENTLY ISSUE A
WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE LEARNED I ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, GOKAK TO TRANSFER O.S.NO.114/2014
TO THE COMMERCIAL COURT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is directed against the impugned order dated
28.11.2022 passed by the I Addl.Senior Civil Judge, Gokak in
Review Petition No.1/2018 whereby the said review petition
filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the trial Court.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3. The material on record discloses that on
26.03.2014, petitioner instituted a suit in O.S.No.114/2014
claiming Rs.3,84,03,010/- along with interest against the
respondents. On 31.12.2015, the Commercial Courts Act, 2015
having coming into force, notifications dated 21.09.2017 and
WP No. 100033 of 2023
08.11.2017 were issued designating the I Addl.District and
Sessions Judge of the district as the Commercial Court.
Subsequently on 03.03.2018, despite the aforesaid notifications
and coming into force of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 as a
result of which, the trial Court did not have jurisdiction or
authority of law to decide the suit which arose out of
commercial dispute, the trial Court proceeded to dismiss the
suit on merits. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/plaintiff
filed a review petition specifically bringing to the notice of the
trial Court that in view of coming into force of the Commercial
Courts Act, 2015 coupled with the notifications designating the
Commercial Court, the trial Court which was a non-designated
Commercial Court did not have jurisdiction or authority of law
and could not have passed the impugned judgment and decree
on merits in view of the inherent lack of jurisdiction on the part
of the trial Court to adjudicate the suit on merits. The aforesaid
review petition filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed by
the trial Court vide impugned order which is called in question
in the present petition.
4. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, pursuant to coming into force of the Commercial
WP No. 100033 of 2023
Courts Act, 2015 and the Commercial Courts being designated
vide notifications dated 21.09.2017 and 08.11.2017 whereby
the X Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi was
designated as the Commercial Court, the trial Court i.e. the II
Addl.Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Gokak had inherent lack
of jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the suit which ought to have
been transferred to the District Court by virtue of Section 15(2)
of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and failure on the part of
the trial Court to appreciate this has resulted in erroneous
conclusion. So also, a perusal of the impugned order passed by
the trial Court dismissing the Review Petition No.1/2018 will
clearly indicate that the trial Court has committed a grave and
serious error in failing to consider the inherent lack of
jurisdiction on the part of the trial Court which proceeded to
dispose off the suit on merits despite not having jurisdiction or
authority of law to do so which is clearly an error apparent on
the face of the record warranting review of the same under
Section 114 r/w Order XLVII Rule 1 C.P.C. Under these
circumstances, I am of the view that the impugned order
passed by the trial Court dismissing the Review Petition
No.1/2018 as well as the judgment and decree dated
WP No. 100033 of 2023
03.03.2018 passed in O.S.No.114/2014 deserve to be set aside
consequent upon which the suit has to be directed to be
transferred to the designated Commercial Court to be decided
in accordance with law. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
i. The petition is allowed.
ii. The impugned order dated 28.11.2022 is
hereby set aside. Consequently, Review
Petition No.1/2018 filed by the petitioner also
stands allowed.
iii. Consequent upon allowing Review Petition
No.1/2018, the judgment and decree dated
03.03.2018 passed by the II Addl. Senior Civil
Judge and J.M.F.C., Gokak is hereby set aside
and the suit is restored to file.
iv. Pursuant to restoration of the suit in
O.S.No.114/2014 by virtue of this order, the
trial Court is directed to transfer the suit to the
jurisdictional designated Commercial Court who
shall proceed further in accordance with law.
SD
JUDGE
CLK
