IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA W.P.No.15841/2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
M/s Diamond Granites #867/4A, Smuduganda Palli, Hosur Taluk, Denkanikota Road, T.N-635114, Camp: Bengaluru, Represented by it authorized agent, Mr. Prateek Ajmera, Aged about 32 years. ... Petitioner (By Sri. A.Mahesh Chowdhary, Advocate) AND:
1. Rajani Kulkarni, A-42, Devaraj URS Trucks Terminals, Opp Kanteerva Studios, Yashwantpur, Bengaluru-560022.
2. Oceanus Transports, No.12, Grass Villa, 1st A Main, BEML Township Road, GM Palya, New Thippasandra, Bengaluru-566075, Represented by its Managing Director.
3. Silver Bay Shipping, No.8/2, BEML, Township, Rajkumar Road, New Tippasandra, Bengaluru-566075, Represented by its Managing Director.
4. M/s Solar Cargo and Cleaning Pvt. Ltd., A-42, Devaraj URS Trucks Terminals, Opp Kanteerva Studios, Yashwantpur, Bengaluru-560022, Represented by its Managing Director.
5. KMK Shipping and Cleaning Pvt. Ltd., Old No.76, New No.153, 4th Floor, Thambu Chetty Street, Chennai-600001, Represented by its Managing Director.
6. Easyway Trucks Pvt. Ltd., New No.192, Old No.237, 2nd Floor, Thambuchetty Street, Mannady, Chennai-600001, Represented by its Managing Director ... Respondents (By Smt. Revathy Adinath Narde, Advocate for R1 and R4, Sri. A.V. Amarnathan, Advocate for R2) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 08.04.2019 vide Annexure-A on the file of O.S.No.94/2019 in the court of LXXXII Additional City Civil and Session Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-83) as bad and contrary to position of law and to allow IA No.1/19.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The plaintiff has filed the present writ petition against the order dated 08.04.2019 issuing emergent notice on I.A.No.1 and suit summons to the defendants returnable by 30.05.2019.
2. The petitioner who is the plaintiff before the trial Court filed suit for declaration holding that defendant Nos.1 to 6 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- towards the detention charges along with excess/additional CHF paid, ongoing detention charges and consequent loss in production caused to the plaintiff and to direct the defendants to pay interest at the rate of 18% p.a. for Rs.30,00,000/- from the date of filing this instant suit and also further interest up to the date of decree and to grant an order of Mandatory Injunction directing defendants, their servants, agents, heirs, henchmen or anybody claiming through or under to return and deliver to plaintiff all materials pertaining to the containers such as delivery note, materials, customs documents, containers and all relevant documents pertaining to shipping transaction assigned by plaintiff and consequently from interfering the activities or business conducted by plaintiff etc., raising various contentions. The trial Court on the application filed in I.A.No.1 by an impugned order dated 08.04.2019 issued emergent notice on I.A.No.1 and suit summons to the defendants returnable by 30.05.2019. Hence, present writ petition is filed.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
4. Sri.A.Mahesh Chowdhary, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the trial Court ought to have considered the application for temporary injunction in view of the urgency pleaded, but the trial Court issued emergent notice on I.A.No.1 and suit summons to the defendants is nothing but refusing temporary injunction. Therefore, he sough to allow the writ petition.
5. Per contra, Smt. Revathy Adinath Narde, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 4 and Sri.A.V.Amarnatha, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the very writ petition filed is not maintainable against issuance of notice and suit summons to the defendants, the trial Court has not passed any discretionary order either refusing or allowing the application, in the absence of any order, mere issuance of notice, the writ petition is not maintainable. Therefore, sought for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, in view of the suit filed by the plaintiff for the relief sought for and urgency pleaded, the trial Court was of the considered opinion that “Perused the plaint, I.A.No.1 and the documents placed on record. Issue emergent notice on I.A.No.1 and suit summons to defendants returnable by 30.05.2019”. The trial Court has not refused the temporary injunction sought for and has only issued emergent notice on I.A.No.1 as well as suit summons to defendants. Now the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and respondent No.2 are present before the Court and fairly submits that they will file objections to I.A.No.1 for temporary injunction on or before 25.04.2019 before the trial Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to furnish all the plaint papers and other annexures to the learned counsel for the respondents representing before this Court forthwith, the liberty is also reserved to the other defendants to file objections, if any, to I.A.No.1 before trial Court on or before 25.04.2019, if they are served on or before that date.
7. The trial Court shall consider the application and objections and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as contemplated under Order 39 Rule 3A of Code of Civil Procedure. The petitioner is also permitted to file application for advancement of the case from 30.05.2019 to 25.04.2019, the trial Court shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.
KPS Sd/- JUDGE