Karnataka High Court
The State Of Karnataka vs M/S Jyoti Construction Co on 8 April, 2024
Author: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
Bench: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6296
RSA No. 5805 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 5805 OF 2013 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY ITS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
GADAG - 582 101.
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
COMMUNICATION AND BUILDING (NORTH),
DHARWAD - 580 001.
3. THE SUPTD. ENGINEER,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
COMMUNICATION AND BUILDING (NORTH),
DHARWAD - 580 001.
Digitally signed
by SUJATA 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
SUBHASH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
PAMMAR GADAG DIVISION,
Location: HIGH GADAG - 580 001.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP)
AND:
1. M/S. JYOTI CONSTRUCTION CO.,
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
BY ITS PARTNER,
SRI. MANOHAR MUKKANNAPPA KORI,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6296
RSA No. 5805 of 2013
AGE: 55 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: POOPALI DIXIT ROAD,
VILLE PARLE (EAST) MUMBAI,
BY THE GENERAL POWER OF
ATTORNEY HOLDER
SRI. ASHOK SIDRAMAPPA ANGADI,
AGE: 40 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. MULGUND ROAD,
GADAG - 582 101
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SNTOSHKUMAR G. RAMPUR, ADVOCATE)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE 27.04.2013 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.22/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST
TRACK COURT AT GADAG, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL, FILED
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.08.2007 AND THE DECREE
PASSED IN O.S.NO.117/1998 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN.) & CJM, GADAG, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR
SETTLING THE BILLS, DECLARATION AND PERMANENT
INJUNCTION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENT THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6296
RSA No. 5805 of 2013
JUDGMENT
The Government has filed the regular second appeal
challenging the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2013 passed
in R.A. No.22/2007 by the Fast Track, Gadag which modified
the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2007 passed in
O.S.No.117/1998 by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and C.J.M.,
Gadag.
2. For the purpose of convenience, the ranking of the
parties is referred to as per their status before the Trial Court.
3. The plaintiff has filed a suit for settlement of bills of
having undertaken construction of road work from Gadag to
Belaganur and the Trial Court has decreed the suit as prayed
for. Upon the appeal filed by the Government, the First
Appellate Court has allowed the appeal in part by modifying the
judgment and decree of the Trial Court of setting aside the cost
incurred for removal of Jungal from Gadag to Belaganur. To this
extent only, the First Appellate Court has modified the
judgment and decree of the Trial Court.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6296
4. Learned counsel for the respondent filed memo on
03.04.2024 stating that in execution petition No.87/2023 which
is filed by the respondent for execution of the decree, in which
the government has filed undertaken affidavit dated
22.03.2024 stating that the Government will make payment of
decretal amount. Therefore, learned counsel for the
Government/appellants and respondent submitted that in view
of undertaken given by the appellants/Government to satisfy
the decree passed by the First Appellate Court, then the appeal
would not survive for consideration.
5. Having placed on record the memo filed by the
respondent, the appellants/Government has undertaken
payment of decretal amount to the respondent. Therefore, the
appeal does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is
liable to be dismissed as having become infructuous. Therefore,
the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SSP
CT:ANB
