Karnataka High Court
M/S Pathak Developers Pvt Ltd vs M/S Housing Development Finance ... on 29 February, 2024
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:8495
CRL.RP No. 30 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 30 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. M/S. PATHAK DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,
NO.2997, 2ND FLOOR, RUKMA COMPLEX,
KALIDASA ROAD, V.V. MOHALLA,
MYSURU-560002
REPRESENTED ITS CHAIRMAN AND MD
SRI JAYARAM PATHAK
2. SRI JAYARAM PATHAK
S/O SRI KRISHNAJI MALHAR PATHAK,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
CHAIRMAN AND MD OF
M/S. PATHAK DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,
NO.2997, 2ND FLOOR, RUKMA COMPLEX,
Digitally signed KALIDASA ROAD, V.V. MOHALLA,
by SHARANYA T MYSURU-560002
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ALSO AT:
MR.JAYARM PATHAK
S/O SRI KRISHNAJI, MALHAR PATHAK
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
R/AT NO.2992/1,
3RD MAIN, V.V.MAHOLLA,
MYSORE-560002
3. SRI SHRIHARI PATHAK
S/O SRI JAYARAM PATHAK,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
DIRECTOR OF
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:8495
CRL.RP No. 30 of 2022
M/S PATHAK DEVELOPERS PVT LTD.,
NO.2997, 2ND FLOOR, RUKMA COMPLEX,
KALIDASA ROAD, V.V.MOHALLA,
MYSORE-560002
ALSO AT:
MR.SHRIHARI PATHAK
S/O SRI JAYARAM PATHAK
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
NO.2997, 3RD MAIN, V.V.MOHALLA,
MYSORE-560002
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DEVARAJA M., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
AND:
1. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE
CORPORATION LTD.,
HDFC HOUSE NO.51,
KASRURBA ROAD,
BENGALURU-560001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SENIOR MANAGER (RECOVERIES)
AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
SRI MANOJ SHAH.
...RESPONDENT
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED
01.03.2021 IN CRL.A.NO.1885/2019 ON THE FILE OF LXXV
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-76)
BANGALORE AND ALSO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
02.08.2019 PASSED IN C.C.NO.19741/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE XXV ACMM, BANGALORE AND THIS APPEAL MAY BE
ALLOWED WITH COSTS.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:8495
CRL.RP No. 30 of 2022
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This Court issued notice vide order dated 20.02.2023
against the respondent and the counsel has not paid the
P.F. For want of P.F and copies, again matter listed on
18.04.2023, once again the counsel sought for time, hence
this Court granted two weeks time to do the needful. Once
again listed before the Court on 29.09.2023 after the
issuance of notice, the counsel was absent and no
representation and this Court once again granted two
weeks time to do the needful. Even after issuance of
notice, when the matter listed thrice, the counsel has not
paid P.F. On verification of the order sheet also, though
the petition was filed in the year 2021, even for
compliance also this matter was listed 5 times and again
even after imposing the cost also, listed twice i.e., on
09.01.2023 and 27.01.2023. Inspite of it, the counsel for
NC: 2024:KHC:8495
appellants' is not diligent in pursuing the matter. Hence,
the revision petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RHS
