M/S Cears Consumer Products vs M/S Mtr Foods Pvt Ltd
2024 Latest Caselaw 22517 Kant

Karnataka High Court

M/S Cears Consumer Products vs M/S Mtr Foods Pvt Ltd on 4 September, 2024

Author: R Devdas

Bench: R Devdas

                                         -1-
                                                     NC: 2024:KHC:36130
                                                   WP No. 20004 of 2024




                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                   DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

                                      BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 20004 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)


              BETWEEN:

              M/S CEARS CONSUMER PRODUCTS
              A PARTNRSHIP FIRM
              SY NO 9, CEARS KEON COMPLEX
              MALLIMANAKAPURA VILLAGE
              CHINTAMANI ROAD
              HOSAKOTE TALUK
              BENGALURU 562114
              REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER
              MR REJIN JOSEPH CHALAPURAM
              AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
                                                           ...PETITIONER
              (BY SRI. M.R.RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
                  SMT.BEENA P K., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by JUANITA
THEJESWINI
Location: HIGH M/S MTR FOODS PVT LTD.,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA        A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE
                 COMPANIES ACT, 1956
                 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
                 NO 1, 2 AND 3RD FLOOR
                 100 FEET INNER RING ROAD
                 EJIPURA, ASHWINI LAYOUT
                 VIVEKNAGAR SO
                 BENGALURU 560047
                                                         ...RESPONDENT
              (BY SRI. SRINANDAN.K, ADVOCATE)
                                 -2-
                                             NC: 2024:KHC:36130
                                         WP No. 20004 of 2024




     THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION TO
EXPEDITE THE HEARING AND EARLY DISPOSAL OF COM. AP
135/2022 WHICH IS NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE
LXXXIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
BENGALUUR(CCH-90) AND ETC.,

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:    HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

                         ORAL ORDER

Sri. Srinandan.K, learned counsel has entered appearance

for the respondent.

2. Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, appearing for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 34

of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (hereinafter

referred to as the Act for short) questioning the award passed

by the arbitral tribunal. However, the appeal was filed after the

statutory period provided for filing an appeal and therefore, the

appeal was filed along with an application seeking condonation

of delay. Another application was also filed by the petitioner,

seeking stay of the execution proceedings initiated by the

respondent. Both the applications are yet to be considered. In

the meanwhile, if the respondent is permitted to proceed with

the execution case, it will render the appeal filed by the

NC: 2024:KHC:36130

petitioner useless. Learned Senior Counsel would therefore

submit that appropriate directions may be issued to the

Commercial Court to decide the applications filed by the

petitioner seeking condonation of delay and stay, and in the

meanwhile, necessary directions may be given by the Court

considering the execution petition filed by the respondent, not

to take up the matter till the applications filed by the petitioner

are decided by the Commercial Court.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the

reasons furnished in the affidavit accompanying the application

seeking condonation of delay are so bald, that the application is

required to be rejected.

4. Having heard the learned counsels and on perusing the

petition papers and having regard to the innocuous prayer

made in the writ petition, this Court is of the considered opinion

that the execution case filed by the respondent is not to be

considered till the applications filed by the petitioner seeking

condonation of delay and stay is considered by the Commercial

Court. This will be in tune with several judgments passed by

the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein, it is held that if an appeal

NC: 2024:KHC:36130

filed by the party who suffered a decree is not considered and

in the meanwhile, if execution proceedings are permitted to be

continued and if the decree is executed, it will render the

appeal useless, and it would amount to travesty of justice.

5. Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of with

a direction to the learned LXXIX Additional City Civil and

Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-90), before whom the

Commercial Appeal No.135/2022 is pending, to consider and

dispose of the two applications filed by the petitioner for

condonation of delay and stay. If the Commercial Court has

already heard the application for condonation of delay, it is free

to pass orders. Nevertheless, during the pendency of the

appeal in Commercial Appeal No.135/2022, the execution case

filed by the respondent in Commercial Execution No.131/2023

shall not be proceeded with. The Commercial Court is also

required to take into consideration the statutory period

permitted for an appeal filed under Section 34 of the Act and

accordingly, expedite the hearing and dispose of the appeal.

Sd/-

(R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv