Karnataka High Court
B G Narayanswamy vs Mysore Sales International Limited on 4 June, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:19229
WP No. 4885 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 4885 OF 2017 (GM-CFA)
BETWEEN:
B.G.NARAYANSWAMY,
S/O B.N.GOPAL,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT NO.2, 4TH CROSS,
PRIYADARSHINI LAYOUT,
CHIKKADEVASANDRA, K.R.PURAM,
BENGALURU - 560 036.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. E. RAJAGOPAL., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MYSORE SALES INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,
Digitally signed by B
K
MSIL HOUSE, 36,
MAHENDRAKUMAR
Location: HIGH
CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 052.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
GENERAL MANAGER.
.
2. SMT.THAYAMMA,
W/O PUTAPPA,
NO.17/1-8, 9TH MAIN ROAD,
6TH CROSS, R.K.LAYOUT,
2ND PHASE, REVENUE EXTENSION,
KADIRENAHALLI,
PADMANABHANAGAR,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:19229
WP No. 4885 of 2017
BANGALORE - 560 070.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B S JEEVAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 SD)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
JUDGMENT DECREE DATED 26.8.2016 PASSED BY THE
ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
BANGALORE IN DIPUTE NO.31/2014-15 VIDE ANNEXURE - D
AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The order dated 26.08.2016 passed by the Additional
Registrar of Co-Operative Societies, Bengaluru, at Annexure
'D', by which the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of
Rs.15,51,950/- along with interest towards the chit payment.
2. Learned counsel for the contesting respondent submits
that against the impugned order an efficacious remedy of
appeal is provided under Section 70 of the Chit Funds Act
before the Government. He further submits that the petitioner
has not complied with the interim order by depositing a sum of
Rs.6,00,000/-. He further argued that the proceedings under
Section 68 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 as well as proceedings
for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act can
NC: 2024:KHC:19229
be maintained for recovering the dues from the petitioner. In
support he places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of D PURUSHOTAMA REDDY AND
ANOTHER VS. K SATEESH reported in (2008) (8) SCC 505.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision has held
that -
" Although, it is beyond any doubt or dispute
that for the same cause of action both a civil suit
and a complaint petition under Section 138 of NI
Act would be maintainable, in terms of Section
357 CrPC, a duty is cast upon the civil courts to
take into account the sum paid or recovered as
compensation in the criminal proceedings. The
judgment of conviction and sentence was passed
by the criminal court on 15.12.2005. The suit
was decreed by the civil court on 23.1.2006.
Deposit of a sum of Rs.2,00,000 by the
appellants in favour of the respondent was
directed by the criminal court. Such an order
should have been taken into consideration by the
civil court."
NC: 2024:KHC:19229
3. In view of the same, the petitioner having not complied
with the interim order, the present petition is dismissed as not
maintainable.
Sd/-
JUDGE
YKL
