Karnataka High Court
Achutha Institute Of Technology vs M/S Flow & Force Engineers on 6 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:19913
WP No. 31479 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO. 31479 OF 2019 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
ACHUTHA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,
GOPALAPURA, JALA HOBLI,
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,
PIN NO:560 129.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. G. NARASI REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. THANUJA M.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S FLOW & FORCE ENGINEERS,
NO.35, NEW TIMBER YARD LAYOUT,
Digitally AVALAHALLI, MYSORE ROAD,
signed by BANGALORE-560 026.
SUVARNA T REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
Location: SRI S.V. SHIVANNA.
HIGH
COURT OF 2. THE PRINCIPAL,
KARNATAKA ACHUTHA INSTITUTIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY,
SURVEY NO.115, BOMMANAHALLI,
CHIKKABALLAPURA -561 209.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N. MANOHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH IMPUGNED
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:19913
WP No. 31479 of 2019
ORDER DATED 01.06.2019 PASSED ON IA.NO.II FILED BY THE
R-1 UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC OF THE LEARNED XX ADDL.
CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE, BENGALURU [CCH-32] IN
EXECUTION PETITION NO.2301/2016 AS PER ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRILIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.2 on the file of
the XX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in
Ex.P.No.2301/2016, dated 01.06.2019, the obstructer is before
this Court.
2. Respondent No.1 is the plaintiff in the suit. He has filed
O.S.No.3981/2014 for recovery of money, the same was
decreed on 06.06.2016. Thereafter, the decree holder had filed
the petition seeking attachment of the movables of the
judgment debtor. The petitioner had obstructed the same
stating that the property does not belong to the decree holder
and the said property cannot be attached. The Court below
considering the said stand taken by the obstructer, had passed
this Order wherein the Court had observed that the obstructer
is the sister concern of the judgment debtor. Further, it also an
admitted fact that the management of the obstructer institution
and the judgment debtor institution are one and the same.
NC: 2024:KHC:19913
When the obstructer is the sister concern of judgment debtor,
her belongings also becomes the belongings of the judgment
debtor. Accordingly, allowed the Petition.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/
obstructer submits that the Court below had observed that they
have admitted the fact that both the obstructer and the
judgment debtor firms are the sister concern which is contrary
to the objections filed by him and he has submitted that the
Court below without any basis had observed that it is an
admitted fact. It is further submitted that infact they are
denying the fact that the judgment debtor has any connection
with the obstructer college. It is submitted that the said order
passed by the Court below is liable to be set aside.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits
that both the institutions are one and the same. It is the same
management, only to frustrate the decree the obstructer has
come up with such a plea. It is further submitted that the Court
below had rightly passed the Order. The petitioner had obtained
the stay order and till now they could not enjoy the fruits of
decree.
NC: 2024:KHC:19913
5. Having heard the learned counsel on either side,
perused the material placed on record. According to the decree
holder, the obstructer and the judgment debtor are the
partners of the institutions and both the institutions are the
sister concerns. It is the case of the obstructer that the
judgment debtor has nothing to do with the Bangalore
institution where the attachment order is passed. The Court
below had observed that it is an admitted fact and this Court
had perused the objections. In that, nowhere they have
admitted the same.
6. Considering all these, this Court deems it appropriate
to set aside this Order and remand the matter to the Court
below and before the Court below the obstructer as well as the
judgment debtor are at liberty to adduce the evidence with
regard to the connection between judgment debtor and the
obstructer's institution. Accordingly, the impugned order in
I.A.No.2 in Ex.P.No.2301/2016 dated 01.06.2019 passed by the
XX Addl. City Civil and Session Judge, Bengaluru is set aside
and the matter is remanded back to the Court below.
NC: 2024:KHC:19913
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is 'allowed' by setting
aside the order dated 01.06.2019 and the matter is remanded
to the Court below for fresh consideration.
1. Both the parties shall appear before the Court
below on 19.06.2024.
2. Both the parties are at liberty to adduce the
evidence.
3. Within two months from 19.06.2024, the Court
below shall dispose of the petitions.
Pending I.As if any, shall stand disposed of.
SD/-
JUDGE
BN
